1
10
17
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7a9baa2aa9e7c07e6a32dda13ed6cc29.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=rjuHLgu2IYSJZVeRzekibHy2l2LBu%7EjQ4zd3cehJMG1OMSbEzraRJRlO3O5xaIHZ9%7Ev9lNEbm-0mLV9y70crVMpuDp5riznTdX%7EukpavfVF8ESOR5kp0nQ-rxg9kb2lpVvk9X3xx1T7d%7EMkF4A3rt35bjwl2cEMmrCtzNKTAGNeaQ3KCZ6GBOi7dcN0uZaYcxGOP-lnOtsczQEoiRGm4QkM7AoEdSGCXCcQrEXSpIXk%7EDP-qDyci1Kaj4NDj2V5KBb6Sp1shEyyjjjcGNGTHVZ42upViuO41yPFeTp9aw32kn-dzPPM6QzXrrTibxL1BRMlgMcIPvhTPso72r4wUQw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
76df4cb2ecff70614305efd9b61e5212
PDF Text
Text
oé’?
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
THE LEGALISATION
OF
FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
By
ANNIE
BESANT.
[Reprinted from the National Reformer, June 4, 1876,j
The first annual meeting of the “British, Continental, and General
Federation for the Abolition of Government Regulation of Prostitu
tion ” was lately held at the Westminster Palace Hotel, and was
largely attended by friends of the movement from all parts of Eng
land, from France, and from Switzerland. M. Loyson, better known
as Father Hyacinthe, was to have been present, but a severe attack
of bronchitis chained him to his room ; M. de Pressensé, another
well-known French speaker, was, however, there to take his place,
together with M. Aimé Humbert, a gentleman whose talent appears
to lie in organisation and in work more than in speech. The longsustained labor of the Society for the Repeal of the Contagious
Diseases Acts is well-known to our readers ; many of them may not,
however, be aware of the late extension of the sphere of them work,
consequent on the thought and toil of their noble-hearted missionary,
Mrs. Josephine E. Butler. The narrative of her crusade through
Europe in the bitter cold, through France, into Italy, into Switzer
land, over the Jura in the depth of winter, now lies before us, and is
the record of a heroism equalled by few women, or by few men either.
(The title of the book is “The New Abolitionists”, price half-acrown, and it well deserves careful perusal, ) Undaunted by failure,
unwearied by defeat, loyal in spite of taunts, brave in spite of threats,
gallant-hearted in face of a misery and an evil which might well
drive the boldest to despair, Mrs. Butler sets us all an example by
which we should strive to profit. Societies have been formed in all
�2
THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
directions in France, Switzerland, and Italy, and these are now feder
ated together into one body, sworn to destroy the recognition and
encouragement of prostitution by the State.
Reaction from Christian cant upon this subject, and the rightful
recognition of the sacredness and dignity of human nature, physical
as well as mental,. have to a great extent prejudiced many of the
Secular party against the society agitating for repeal; the unwise
and indelicate proceeding of scattering wholesale—so that they fell
into the hands of the youth of both sexes—a number of tracts and
leaflets dealing with medical details and with terrible crime«, the
perusal of which by young girls and boys is about as wholesome as
the reading of the Police News, roused a feeling of bitter indignation
against those whose names appeared as leaders of the repeal move
ment, although they were very likely utterly ignorant of the follies
perpetrated by unwise coadjutors. This phase fortunately seems to
have disappeared ; and it is hardly necessary to say that there is
nothing in the^speeches made at the meetings of the society to which
the most prudish could object, unless, indeed, they object to the
question being dealt with at all. Should this position be taken,
surely it is then well to remind such that the discussions to which
they object only become necessary through the existence of the evil
attacked, and that the lack of modesty lies in the commission of the
evil, and not in the endeavor to rescue the victims of it. When men
of the world angrily object to women touching such a subject, they
should remember that if they really respected the modesty and purity
of women no such subject would be in existence, and that to tho&e
who gain nothing by the perpetuation of prostitution their loud in
dignation looks very much like the angry dread of a slave -owner who
fears that the abolitionist preacher may possibly, sooner or later,
deprive him of the services of his human property. I assert that the
Secular party, as a whole, has a duty with regard to this subject,
which it somewhat fails to discharge; a duty towards the promotion
of national morality, of national health; and a duty also of asserting
the sacredness of the individual liberty of women as well as of men,
the inalienable rights of each over his or her own person.
It is perfectly true that marriage is different as regarded from the
Secularist and from the Christian point of view. The Secularist
reverences marriage, but he regards marriage as something far higher
thana union “blessed” by a minister ; he considers, also, that marriage
should be terminable, like any other contract, when it fails in its
object, and becomes injurious instead of beneficial; he does not
despise human passion, or pretend that he has no body; on the con
trary, reverencing nature,, he regards physical union as perfecting
the union of heart and mind, and sees in the complete unity of
marriage the possibility of a far higher and nobler humanity than
either man or woman can attain in a state of celibacy. But, surely,
in proportion to our admiration for this true marriage, and our
reverence for the home which it builds up, and which form s the
healthy and pure nursery for the next generation of citizens, must
be our pain and our regret when we come face to face with prosti-
�THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVEKY IN ENGLAND.
3
tution, .By prostitution I mean simply and solely physical union
sold by one sex and bought by the other, with no love, no respect,
no reverence on either side. Of this, physical degradation and mental
degradation are the invariable accompaniments: just as intoxication
may be sometimes indulged in without leaving perceptible and per
manent bad effects, but, persisted in, destroys body and brain, so
may ®exual irregularity be practised for a time with little apparent
injury, but, persisted in, destroys as fatally as intoxication. This is
no matter of theory, it is simply a matter of observation ; individuals
whose lives are irregular, nations where prostitution is widespread,
lose stamina, virility, physical development, the whole type becoming
degraded. It is urged that “ man’s physical wants must be satisfied,
and therefore prostitution is a necessity”. Why therefore ? It might
as well be argued, man's hunger must be appeased, and therefore
theft of food is a necessity. The two things have no necessary con
nexion with each other. Does prostitution promote the national
health ? If so, why this necessity for legislation to check the spread
of contagious diseases ? Those diseases spring from sexual irregu
larities, and are an outraged Nature’s protest against the assertion
that prostitution is the right method of providing for the sexual
necessities of man. As surely as typhoid results from filth and
neglect, so does the scourge of syphilis follow in the wake of prosti
tution. These unfortunate women who are offered up as victims of
man’s pleasure, these poor white slaves sold for man’s use, these
become their own avengers, repaying the degradation inflicted on
them, and spreading ruin and disease among thore for whose wants
they exist as a class. Mrs. Butler truly writes : “You can under
stand how the men who have riveted the slavery of women for such
degrading ends become, in a generation or two, themselves the greater
slaves; not only the slaves of their own enfeebled and corrupted
natures, but of the women whom they have maddened, hardened, and
stamped under foot. Bowing down before the unrestrained dictates
of their own lusts, they now bow down also before the tortured and
fiendish womanhood which they have created. . . . They plot and
plan in vain for their own physical safety. Possessed at times with
a sort of stampede of terror, they rush to International Congresses,
aad forge together more chains for the dreaded wild beast they have
SO carefully trained, and in their pitiful panic build up fresh barri
cades between themselves and that womanhood which they proclaim
to be a ‘permanent source of sanitary danger’.” Mrs. Butler was
writing from Paris, where the system is carried out which we have in
England in only a few towns. If any one doubts the reality of this
natural retribution, let him go and watch the streets where many of
these poor ruined creatures may be found, and there see what women
are when transformed into prostitutes—a source of disease instead of
health, of vice instead of purity. Each one might have been the
centre of a happy home, the mother of brave men and women who
would have served the Fatherland, and we have made them this.
National morality and national health go hand-in-hand; a vicious
nation will be a weak nation, and when a government begins to deli
�4
THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
berately license women for the purposes of prostitution, it has taken
the first step towards the ruin of the nation it administers. Louis
Napoleon made Paris a sink of impurity; when the struggle came,
the working-classes only—whose circumstances preserved them from
gross excesses—-were fit to fight for France. When the license system
has had a fair trial, and the danger spreads and spreads, the govern
ment finds itself burdened with a class of women it has formed and
certificated; and despairing of repressing disease by simple licensing,
it begins to gather the women into houses, licensed also by itself;
abroad, in England’s colonies, these houses are licensed by England’s
riders, and in France, in Italy, and elsewhere, they are found in most
cities. Thus government becomes saddled with the supervision of a
vast and organised system of prostitution, and struggles vainly against
the evils resulting from it. In Italy, the government draws money
from this source, and the shame of Italy’s daughters and the profli
gacy of her sons are made a source of national revenue. And what
is the result ? simply that these houses become foci of vice,
demoralising the youth of the country. “Pastor Borel testified to
having seen schoolboys entering these haunts of patented vice, with
their satchels on their backs.” Well might we ask, with the old Roman
Consul, Postumius : “ Can ye think that such youths are fit to be mad@
soldiers ? That wretches brought out of the temple of obscenity
could be trusted with arms ? That those contaminated with such
debaucheries could be the champions for the chastity of the wives
and children of the Roman people ? ” Profligates can never be made
into sturdy citizens ; muscles enervated by the embraces of purchased
women will never be strung to heroism ; a vicious nation will never
be a nation of freemen. Then, in the name of the liberty we have
won, of the glory of England, in the hope of the coming Republic,
we are surely bound to protest against the introduction of a system
among us that has degraded every nation in which it has been tried,
which has only got, as yet, one foot upon our shores, and which, if
we were true to our duty, we might easily drive from our English
soil before it has time to sap the strength of our men and to destroy
the honor of our name.
It still remains to see how this legislation is consonant with indi
vidual liberty; how it is touched by the question of a standing army ;
fond how the evil of prostitution may be met and overcome.
I have already urged that no repressive Acts wall destroy disease
in a community where prostitution is encouraged, and that the wide
prevalence of prostitution is ruinous to the physique of a nation; the
admitted failure of regulation abroad, and the more and more com
plete control demanded for the police over the unfortunate worn®
sacrificed to the “necessities of men”, prove, beyond the possibility
of denial, that no eradication of disease is to be hoped for unless the
registered women be given over thoroughly to continual supervision,
and be literally made slaves, equally obedient to the call of the doctor
who heals and to that of the man who infects, holding their bodies at
the hourly order of each class, with no rightv of self-possession, no
power of self-rule permitted to them. I challenge this claim, made in
�THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
O
the name of the State, over one class of its citizens, and I assert that
the sacred right of individual liberty is grossly and shamefully out
raged by this interference of government, and that, therefore, every
soldier of liberty is bound to rise in protest against the insult offered
to her. No more inalienable right exists than the right of the indi
vidual to the custody of his own person; in a free country none can
be deprived of this right save by a sentence given in open court, after
a jury of his peers has found him guilty of a crime which, by the laws
under which he lives, is punished by restriction of that liberty; so
jealously is this right guarded, however, even in the criminal whose
full exercise of it is temporarily suspended, that the limits within
which it may be touched are carefully drawn ; even in the prison-cell
th© felon has not lost all right over himself, and his personal liberty
is only restricted on the points where the law has suspended it. No
official may dare to compel a criminal to labor, for instance, unless
compulsion to labor is part of the judicial sentence. Firm and strong
lies the foundation stone of liberty. No citizen’s personal liberty may
be interfered with, unless proof of guilt justifying that interference be
tendered in open court, and every citizen has a right to demand that open
trial if he be arrested by any officer of the law. This is the foundation
Stone which is rudely upset by the Contagious Diseases Acts. Under
them women are arrested, condemned, and sentenced to a terrible
punishment, without any open accusation or public trial; by simple
brute force they are compelled to submit, despite their pleading, their
ene®, their struggles; they have no redress, no assistance ; they are
degraded both in their own sight and in the sight of all who deal with
them; a free woman is deprived by force of the custody of her own
body, and all human right is outraged in her person —and for what ?
in order that men may more safely degrade her in the future, and may
use her for their own amusement with less danger to themselves. A
number of citizens are deprived of their natural rights in order that
other citizens may profit by their loss ; and the State, the incarnation
of justice, the protector of the rights of all, dares thus to sacrifice the
rights of some of its members to the pleasure of others. It is idle to
urge that these women are too degraded to have any rights; the argu
ment is too dangerous for men to use; for if the women are too
degraded, the men who make and keep them what they are are partners
of their degradation; if the women are brutalised, only brutalised
men can take pleasure in their society; every harsh word cast at these
poor victims recoils with trebled force on the head of those who not
only seek their companionship, but actually pay for the privilege of
consorting with them.
But not only is liberty outraged by this intrusion on individual selfpossession, but it is still further trampled under foot by the injustice
perpetrated. Two citizens commit a certain act; the law punishes
one by seizure, imprisonment, disgrace ; it leaves the other perfectly
fre®. No registration of women would be necessary if the other sex
left women to themselves; no disease could be spread except by the
CO-operation of men. By what sort of justice, then, does the law
Seize one only of two participators in a given action ? If it be pleaded
�6
THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
that individual liberty may be overborne by social necessities-an
argument which does not really admit of being used in this matter—
en the good of society” demands the arrest, imprisonment, and
examination of both parties ; it can serve no useful purpose to allow
unhealthy men to propagate disease among healthy women. If men
have the right to demand the protection of the law, why should
women be deprived of that same protection ? If so necessary for the
safety of men, why not necessary for the safety of women ? Is it not,
really, far more needed among the men, for, if a married man should
contract disease, he may infect his innocent wife and his unborn
children f Surely the State should interfere for the protection of
these , and any man found in a house of ill-fame, or consorting with
a prostitute, should be at once arrested, be compelled to prove that
he is not married, and has no intention of being so ; and, failing such
proof, should be examined, and kept in hospital, if need be, until
perfectly cured. The Acts would be very rapidly repealed in St.
Stephen, s if all their provisions were carried out justly, on both sexes
alike.
Men would not submit to it.” Of course they would not,
if one gleam of manhood remained in them; and neither would women,
with any sense of womanhood, submit to it, if they were not bound
hand and foot by the triple cord of ignorance, weakness, and starva
tion. Poor, pitiful sufferers, trampled on by all, till the sweet flower
of womanhood is crushed out for evermore, and only some faint breath
of. its natural fragrance now and then arises to show how sweet it
might have been if left to grow unbruised. In the name, then, of
Liberty outraged, in the name of Equality disregarded, we claim the
lepeal of these one-sided Acts, even if the bond of Fraternity prove
too weak to hold men back from this cruelty inflicted on their sisters.
But, it is urged, with a celibate standing army, prostitution is a
physical necessity. Then, if an institution lead to disease, deteriora
tion of physique, and moral and mental injury, destroy the institution
which breeds these miseries, instead of trying to kill its offspring one
by one. .A large standing army is unnecessary; the enforcement of
celibacy is a crime. Of course, if a number of young and healthy
men are taken away from home, kept in idleness, and deprived of all
female society, immorality must necessarily result from such an un
natural state of things. The enforcement of celibacy on vigorous men
always results in libertinage, whether among celibate priests or celi*
bate soldiers. But the natural desires of these men are not rightfully
met by the State supplying them with a number of licensed women;
to do that is to treat them simply like brutes, and thereby to degrade
them; it is to teach them that there is nothing holy in love, nothing
sacred in womanhood; it is to change the sacrament of humanity into
an orgie, and to pollute the consecration of the future home with the
remembrance of a parody of love. With a celibate standing army
prostitution is a necessity, and I know of no reason why we should
look at facts as we should like them to be, instead of facts as they
are ; but a celibate standing army is not a necessity. The true safe
guard of a free nation is not a large standing army; rather is it a
well-organised militia, regularly drilled and trained, whose home
�THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND.
7
ties and home-interests will, in ease of honorable war, nerve each arm
with double strength, and string each muscle with the remembrance
of the home that is threatened by the foe. The hero-armies of history
are not the armies which idle in peace, and have nought in common
with the citizens ; such armies are the pet toys of aristocratic generals,
and are easily turned against the people by tyrants and by ambitious
Soldi®'#; but the hero-armies are the armies of citizens, less dainty in
dress, less exact in marching, less finished in evolutions, but men
who fight for home and -wife, who draw sword in a just quarrel, but
to please no prince’s whim; men like Cromwell’s Ironsides, and like
Hampden’s yeomen; men who are terrible in war because lovers of
peace; men who can never be defeated while living; men who know
how to die, but not how to yield.
What remedy is there for prostitution other than that attendant
upon a celibate standing army ? So far as the women are concerned,
the real remedy for prostitution is to give women opportunities of
gaining fairly paid employment. By far the greater number of pros
titutes are such for a living. Men are immoral for their amusement;
Women are immoral for bread. Ladies in the upper classes have no
conception of the stress of agony that drives many a forlorn girl “ on
th® streets”. If some of them would try what life is like when it
consists of making shirts at three halfpence each (cotton not provided),
and starving on the money earned, they would perhaps learn to speak
tt-Or® gently of “those horrid women”. Lack of bread makes many
* girl sell herself, and, once fallen, she is doomed. On the one side
are eelf-respect, incessant toil, starvation ; on the other side prostitu
tion, amusement, plenty. We may reverence the heroic virtue that
mists, but we can scarcely dare to speak harshly of the frailty that
submits. Remunerative employment would half empty the streets;
pay women, for the same work, the same wage that men receive ; let
sex be no disqualification; let women be trained to labor, and edu
cated for self-support; then the greatest of all remedies will be
applied to the cure of prostitution, and women will cease to sell their
bodies when they are able to sell their labor.
The second great remedy, as regards the women, is that society
«hmild make recovery more possible to them. Many a young and lovinggirl is betrayed through her love and her trust; having “fallen” she is
looked down upon by all; deserted, she is aided by none ; everybody
pushes her away, and she is driven on the streets, and in despair,
.reckless, hopeless, she becomes what all around call her, and drearily
sinks to the level assigned her by the world. Meanwhile her seducer
passes unrebuked, and in the families where she would not be admitted
fts seullery-maid he is welcomed as fit husband for the daughter of
the house. . That which has ruined her and many others is only being
’. *n t^ie circles where he moves. A public opinion which
should,be just is sorely needed. The act so venial in the man cannot
be a crime in the woman, and if, as it is said, men must be immoral,
then those who are necessary to them ought not to be looked down
upon for their usefulness. We ask for justice equal to both sexes:
punishment for both, if their intercourse be a crime against society ;
�8
THE LEGALISATION OF FEMALE SLAVERY IN ENGLAND,
immunity for both, if it be a necessary weakness. We hold up one
standard of purity for both, and urge the nobility of sexual morality
on man and woman alike.
More reasonable marriage laws would also tend to lessen prostitution.
Much secret immorality is caused by making the marriage tie so
unfairly stringent as it is to-day; people who are physically and
mentally antagonistic to each other are bound together for life, instead
of being able to gain a divorce without dishonor, and to be set free,
to find in a more congenial union the happiness they have failed to
find with each other. Reasonable facility of divorce would tend to
morality, and would strengthen the bond of union between those who
really loved, who would then feel that their true unity lay in them
selves more than in the marriage ceremony, and was a willing, ever
renewed mutual dedication instead of a hard compulsion.
But at the root of all reform lies the inculcation of a higher morality
than at present prevails. We need to learn a deeper reverence for
nature, and therefore a sharper repugnance for all disregard of
physical and moral law. Young men need to learn reverence
for. themselves and for the physical powers they possess, powers
which tend to happiness when rightly exercised, to misery and
degradation when abused. They need also to learn reverence for the
humanity in those around them, and the duty of guarding in every
woman everything which they honor in mother, wife, and daughter.
If a man realised that in buying a prostitute he was buying the
womanhood of those he loved at home, he would shrink back from
such sacrilege as from the touch of a leper. Woman should be man’s
inspiration, not his degradation; woman’s love should be his prize for
noble effort, not his purchased toy; the touch of a woman’s lips
should breathe of love and not of money, and the clasp of the wife
should tell of passionate devotion and supremest loyalty, and never be
mingled in thought with the memory of arms which were bought by
a bribe, of caress that was paid for in gold.
ONE PENNY.
Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Brablaugh, 63, Fleet Street,
London, E.C.—1885.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The legalisation of female slavery in England
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood [1847-1933]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Reprinted from the National Reformer, June 4, 1976. Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh. Date of publication from British Library catalogue. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.l.].
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1885]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N067
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Prostitution
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The legalisation of female slavery in England), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
NSS
Prostitution
Sex Workers
Women
Women-England
Women's Rights
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8e33668100690cb5b9affc86778fb9f4.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=KQP9XXdTvUH5KkkfNASO0gYmjEZ9lrY1-NPrDvYdtmBz83JBHN-EbfNKyfTbKn6sXYQwpUBY%7ErmrCpyUz8fAWx6fJD9JSWf4Cw-7oFHvMcvFvLc6k5MhALn4ttp3giueNIn7rYXzVSQiJ76pNFc0U6k2PA6UllaSejLKqyGgkYVA%7ERXfvCgdzCkcEfG4EjvgHIV4i0f%7EIwP2QMj4I0e7kICyflR3mU7PeI7p6Sgi2K2AT-nOxd3HtRlvV-OtdZlDbpIa8ZB-NwEAnTIfxylGRM70eZ-LNe7PZ7s7bxfBTuIUv%7EyvXfk0wCsoN8RMPANFbV-fAjKkxuXYunhoTxAEZQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b4cb643324d8e788b9dafe34155b0022
PDF Text
Text
NADONALSECULARSOCIETy
THE
POLITICAL STATUS
OF
WOMEN.
BY
AITNIE
[third
EESANT.
edition.]
LONDON:
FEEETHOUGHT
PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28, STONECUTTER STREET, E.C.
PRICE TWOPENCE.
�LONDON:
PRINTED BY ANNIE BESANT AND CHARLES BRADLAUGH,
28, STONECUTTER STREET, E.C.
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
Various arguments are advanced by the opponents of
woman suffrage, which require to be met by those who
maintain that the political status of women should be the
same as the political status of men. Of these the prin
cipal—apart from party arguments, such as those which re
gard the momentary strengthening of Tory, Whig, or
¿Radical, by the female vote—are as follows :—
Why should the political incompetency of women receive
so much attention when more pressing wrongs require a
remedy ?
Women are naturally unfit for the proper exercise of the
franchise.
They are indifferent about the matter.
They are sufficiently represented as it is.
Political power would withdraw them from their proper
sphere, and would be a source of domestic annoyance.
It can scarcely be necessary for me to clear my way by
proving to you that there are such things as rights. “ Every
great truth,” it has been said, “ must travel through three
stages of public opinion : men will say of it, first, that it is
not true; secondly, that it is contrary to religion; lastly,
that every one knew it already.” The “rights of man”
have battled through these first two stages, and have reached
the third; they have been denounced as a lie, subversive of all
government; they have been anathematised as a heresy, to
be abhorred of all faithful Christians.; but now every one
has always known that men have rights, it is a perfect
truism.. These rights do not rest on the charter of a higher
authority; they are not privileges held at the favour of a
superior; they have their root in the nature of man ; they
are his by “ divine ’’—that is to say, by natural—right.
Kings, presidents, governments, draw their authority from
the will of the people; the people draw their authority
from themselves.
�4
!
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
It is quite a new light to the general public that women
have any rights at all; duties ? ay, plenty of them, with
sharp penalties for their non-fulfilment. Wrongs? ay,
plenty of them, too—wrongs which will not be borne much
longer. Privileges ? yes, if we will take them as privileges,
and own that we hold them at the will of our masters; but
rights ? The assertion was at first met with laughter that
was only not indignant, because it was too contemptuous.
Our truth is as yet in its infancy—first, it is not true;
secondly, it is contrary to religion. The matter is taken
a little more seriously now ; men begin to fancy that these
absurd women are really in earnest, and they condescend
to use a little argument, and to administer a little “soothingsyrup ” to these fractious children. Gentle remonstrance
takes the place of laughter, and thus we arrive at my first
head—surely there are more pressing female wrongs toattend to than the question of political incapacity.
It is perfectly true that the want of representation in
Parliament is not, in itself, a grave injury. In itself, I say,
it is of secondary importance; its gravity consists in what
it involves. You do not value money for its own sake—
those little yellow counters are not intrinsically beautiful,,
nor are they in themselves worth toil, and trouble, and
danger; but you value them for what they represent; and
thus we value a vote, as means to an end. In a free
country, a vote means power. When a man is a voter,
his wishes must be taken into consideration; he counts asone in an election—his opinion influences the return.
When the working-classes wished to alter laws which
pressed hardly on them, they agitated for Parliamentary
reform. What folly 1 what waste of time 1 what throwing
away of strength and energy! how unpractical! Why agitate
for an extension of the franchise, when so many social
burdens required to be lightened ? Why? Because they
knew that when they won the franchise they could trust to
themselves to remedy these social anomalies—when they
had votes, they could make these questions the test of the
fitness or unfitness of a candidate for Parliament. Non
voters, they could only ask for reform; voters, they could
command it. And this is the answer of women to those
who urge on them that they should turn their attention to
practical matters, and leave off this agitation about the
franchise. We shall do nothing so foolish. True, certain
laws press hardly on us; but we are not going now to
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
S
agitate for the repeal of these laws one by one. We might
agitate for a very long time before we gained attention.
We prefer going to the root of the matter at once. We
will win the right of representation in Parliament, and
when we have won that, these laws will be altered. Ten
years after women become voters, there will be some
erasures in the Statute Book. There will no longer be a
law that women, on marriage, become paupers, unless steps
are taken beforehand to prevent it; marriage will. have
ceased to bring with it these disabilities. There will no
longer be a law which gives to the father despotic authority
over the fate of the child ; which enables the father to take
the child from the mother’s arms, and give it into the charge of
some other woman; which makes even the dead father
■able to withhold the child from the living mother. _ There
will be no longer be a law which sanctions the consignment
of thousands of women to misery and despair, jn order
that men’s lives may be made more safely luxurious, and
their homes, when they choose to make them, kept more
pure. The laws whose action is more and more driving
women (in the large towns especially) to prefer unlegalised
marriages to the bonds of legal matrimony, will have
vanished, to the purifying of society and the increased
happiness of both men and women. The possession of a
vote, by giving women a share in the power of the State, will
Also make them more respected. Hitherto, law, declaring
women to be weak, has carefully put all advantages into
the hands of those who are already the powerful. Instead
of guarding and strengthening the feeble, it has bound them
hand and foot, and laid them helpless at the feet of the
strong. To him that hath, it has indeed been given ; and
from her that hath not, has been taken away even the
,protection she might have had.
“ Women are naturally unfit for the proper exercise of
the franchise.” It has been remarked, more than once,
that, in this contest about the voting of women, men and
women have exchanged their characteristics. Women appeal
to reason, men to.instincts; women rely on logic, men on
.assumptions; women are swayed by facts, men . by pre
judices. To all our arguments, to all our reasoning, men
answer, “ It is unfeminine—it is contrary to nature.’’ If
we press them, How and why? we are only met with a
re-assertion of the maxim. I am afraid that we women
.sadly lack the power of seeing differences. It is unfeminine
�6
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
to be a doctor, but feminine to be a nurse. It is unfeminine
to mix drugs, but feminine to administer them. It is un
feminine to study political economy, but feminine to train
the future Statesmen. It is unfeminine to study sanitary
laws, but feminine to regulate the atmosphere of the nursery,
whose wholesomeness depends on those laws. It is un
feminine to mingle with men at the polling-booth, but
feminine to.labour among them in the field and the factories.
In a word, it is unfeminine to know how to do a thing, and
to do.it comprehendingly, wisely, and well j it is feminine to
do things of whose laws and principles we know absolutely
nothing, and to do them ignorantly, foolishly, and badly.
We do not see things in this light.. I suppose it is because
we, as women, have “ the poetical power of seeing re
semblances,” but lack the “ philosophical power of seeing
differences.” We must, however, analyse this natural in
feriority of women; it is shown, we are told, in their mental
weakness, their susceptibility to influence, their unbusiness
like habits. If this natural mental inferiority of woman
be a fact, one cannot but wonder how nature has managed
to make so many mistakes. Mary Somerville, Mrs. Lewis
(better known as George Eliot), Frances Power Cobbe,
Harriet Martineau, were made, I suppose when nature
was asleep. They certainly show no signs of the properlyconstituted feminine intellect. But, allowing that these
women are inferior in mental power to the uneducated
artisan and petty farmer, may I ask why that should be a
political disqualification? I never remember hearing it
urged that the franchise should only be conferred on men
of genius, or of great intellectual attainments. Even the
idea of an educational franchise was sneered at, low as was
the proposed standard of education. When a law is made
which restricts the franchise to those who rise above a
certain mental level, the talk about mental inferiority will
become reasonable and pertinent; but, when that law is.
passed, I fear that nature will not be found to have been
sufficiently careful of the male interest to have placed all
men above the level, and all women below it. Suscepti
bility to influence is an argument that also goes too far. I
am afraid that many people’s opinions are but rarely
“ opinions ” at all. They are simply their neighbours*
thoughts covered over with a film of personal prejudice.
It is, however, a new idea in England that a class liable to.
be unduly influenced should be disfranchised ; the Ballot.
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
7
Act lately passed was, I always understood, specially
designed to protect the weak from the pressure of the
strong. Oliver Cromwell said that it was unjust to deprive
any one of a natural right on the plea that, were it given, it
would be abused. Not so; “when he hath abused it,
judge.” Business incapacity may, or may not, exist on the
part of women; it is difficult to judge what power a person
may have when he is never permitted to exercise it. Tie
' up a man’s hands, and then sneer that he has no aptitude
for writing; or chain his feet, and show his natural inca
pacity for walking. John Stuart Mill has remarked : “ The
ladies of reigning families are the only women who are
allowed the same range of interests and freedom of develop
ment as men, and it is precisely in their case that there is
not found to be any inferiority. Exactly where and in pro
portion as woman’s capacities for government have been
tried, in that proportion have they been found adequate.”
In France, at the present day, the women rule business
matters more than do the men, and the business capacity
of French-women is a matter of notoriety. Lastly, I would
urge on those who believe in women’s natural inferiority,
why, in the name of common sense, are you so terribly
afraid of putting your theory to the proof? Open to women
the learned professions; unlock the gates which bar her
out from your mental strifes ; give her no favour, no special
advantages; let her race you on even terms. She must fail,
if nature be against her; she must be beaten, if nature has
incapacitated her for the struggle. Why do you fear to let
her challenge you, if she is weighted not only with the
transmitted effects of long centuries of inferiority, but is
also bound with nature’s iron chain ? Try. If you are so
sure about nature’s verdict, do not fear her arbitration ; but
if you shrink from our rivalry, we must believe that you feel
our equality, and, to cover your own doubts of your supe
riority, you prattle about our feebleness.
“Women are indifferent about the possession of the
franchise.” If this is altogether true, it is very odd that
there should be so much agitation going on upon the sub
ject. But I am quite willing to grant that the mass of
women are indifferent about the matter. Alas ! it has
always been so. Those who stand up to champion an
oppressed class do not look for gratitude from those for
whom they labour. It is the bitterest curse of oppression
that it crushes out in the breast of the oppressed the very
�8
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
wish to be free. . A man once spent long years in the
Bastille; shut up m his youth, old age found him still in
his dungeon. The people assailed the prison, and, among
others, this prisoner was set free; but the sunshine was
agony to the eyes long accustomed to the darkness, and the
fresh stir of life was as thunder to the ears accustomed to
the silence of the dungeon; the prisoner pleaded to be
kept a prisoner still. Was his action a proof that freedom
is not fair ? The slaves, after generations of bondage, were
willing to remain slaves where their masters were kind and
good. Is this a proof that liberty is not the birthright of
a man ? And this rule holds good in all, and not only in
the extreme, cases I have cited. Habit, custom, make hard
things easy. If a woman is educated to regard man as her
natural lord, she will do so. If the man to whom her lot
falls is kind to her, she will be contented; if he is unkind,
she will be unhappy; but, unless she be an exceptional
character, she will not think of resistance. But women are
now beginning to think of resistance j a deep, low, murmur
ing is going on, suppressed as yet, but daily growing in
intensity; and such a murmur has always been the herald
of revolt. Further, do men think of what they are doing
when they taunt the present agitators with the indifference
shown by women? They are, in effect, telling us that, if
we are m earnest in this matter, we must force it on their
attention 5 we must agitate till every home in England rings
with the subject; we must agitate till mass meetings in
every town compel them to hear us; we must agitate till
every woman has our arguments at her fingers’ ends. Ah !
you are not wise to throw in our teeth the indifference of
women. You are stinging us into a determination that this
indifference shall not last j you are nerving us to a struggle
which will be fiercer than you dream ; you are forcing us
into an agitation which will convulse the' State. You dare
to make indifference a plea for injustice ? Very well; then
the indifference shall soon be a thing of the past. ’ You
have as yet the frivolous, the childish, the thoughtless, on
your side 5 but the cream of womanhood is against you.
We will educate women to reason and to think, and then
the mass will only want a leader.
“ Women are sufficiently represented as it is.” By whom ?
oy those whose interests lie in keeping them in subjection. So
the masters told the workmen : “ We represent you; we take
care of your interests.” The workmen answered : “ We
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
9
prefer to represent ourselves : we like to have our interests
guarded by our own hands.” And such is our answer to
-our “ representatives.” We don’t agree with some of your
views; we don’t like some of your laws ; we object to some
-of your theories for us. You do not really represent us at
all; what you represent is your own interests, which, in
many cases, touch ours. The laws you pass are passed in the
interests of men, and not of women; and naturally so, for you
are made legislators by men, and not by women. There are
few cases where men are really the representatives of women.
John Stuart Mill—now dead, alas!—noblest and most candid
•of philosophers and Statesmen; Professor Fawcett, a future
leader; Jacob Bright, our steadfast friend: these, and a
few others, might fairly be called representatives of women
in Parliament. Outside the House, too, we have a few
gallant champions, pre-eminent among whom is Moncure
Conway, whose voice is always raised on the side of freedom
and justice. But what we demand is the right to choose
our own representatives, so that our voice may have its
share in making the laws which we are bound to obey. We
share the duty of supporting the State, and we claim the
right of helping to guide it. Taxation and representation
run side by side, and if you will not allow us to be repre
sented, you have no right to tax us. I may suggest here, in
reference to the contest about married women having votes,
that this point is altogether foreign to the discussion. The
right to a vote and the qualification for a vote, are two dis
tinct things, and come under different laws. The one is
settled by Act of Parliament, the other by the revising
barrister. A blunder was lately made by putting into a Bill
a special disqualification of married women. Such a clause
is absurdly out of place. We are contending to remove
from a whole sex a legal disability; the details come later,
and must be arranged when the principle is secured. A
man has the right to vote because he is a man; but he must
possess certain qualifications before he can exercise his
right. Let womanhood, as such, cease to be a disqualifi
cation; that is the main point. Let the discussion on
qualifications follow. Further, if it be urged that women
are represented by their husbands, what are we to say about
those who have none? In 1861, fifteen years ago, there
were three and a half millions of women in England work
ing for their livelihood—two and a half millions of these
were unmarried, and were, therefore, unrepresented. Is
�10
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
there no pathos in these figures ? Two and a half millions
struggling honestly to live, but mute to tell of their wants
or their wrongs. Mute, I say, for not one in a thousand hasthe power of the pen. And this is not the worst. Oh,
friends ! below these, pressed down there by the terrible
struggle for existence, there is a lower depth yet, tenanted
by thousands of whom it is not here my province to speak,
thousands, from whom a bitter wail goes up, to which men’s
ears are deaf. Surely, women need representation—surely,
there are grievances and wrongs of women which can only
be done away by those whom women send to Parliament as
their representatives. It is natural that men should not
desire that many of these laws should be altered. In the
first place, it is impossible they should understand how
hardly they press on women; only those who wear it, says
the proverb, “ know where the shoe pinches.” And, in the
second place, the holders of a monopoly generally object
to have their monopoly interfered with. They can’t imagine
what in the world these outsiders want pressing in upon
their social domains. The nobleman cannot understand
why the peasant should object to the Game Laws; it is so
unreasonable of him. The farmer cannot make out why
the labourer should not attend quietly to his hedging and
ditching, instead of making all this fuss about a union.
The capitalist cannot see the sense of the artisan banding
himself with his brethren, instead of going on with his
duty, and working hard. Men can’t conceive why women
do not attend to their household duties instead of fussing
about Parliament. Unfortunately, each of these tiresome
classes cares very little whether those to whom they are
opposed can or cannot understand why they agitate. We
may be told continually that we are sufficiently repre
sented ; we say that we do not think so, but that we mean
to be.
“ Political power would withdraw women from their
proper sphere, and would be a source of domestic annoyance.”
Their proper sphere—/.<?., the home. This allegation is
a very odd one. Men are lawyers, doctors, merchants;
every hour of the day is pledged, engrossing speculations
stretch the brain, deep questions absorb the mind, great
ideas swell in the intellect. Yet men vote. If occupation
be a fatal disqualification, let us pass a law that only idle
people shall have votes. You will withdraw workers from
their various spheres of work, if you allow them to take an
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
II
interest in politics. For heaven’s sake, do not go and take
the merchant from the desk, the doctor from the hospital,
the lawyer from the court; you will disorganise society—you will withdraw the workers. Do you say it is not so—
that the delivery of a vote takes up a very short time at
considerable intervals ? that a man must have some leisure,,
and may very well expend it, if he please, in studying
politics ? that a change of thought is very good for the
weary brain? that the alteration of employment is a
positive and most valuable relaxation? You are quite
right; outside interests are healthy, and prevent private
affairs from becoming morbidly engrossing. The study of
large problems checks the natural tendency to be absorbed
in narrower questions. A man is stronger, healthier,
nobler, when, in working hard in trade or in profession for
his home, he does not forget he is a citizen of a mighty
nation. I can think of few things more likely to do women
real good than anything which would urge them to extend
their interests beyond the narrow circle of their homes..
Why, men complain that women are bigoted, narrow
minded, prejudiced, impracticable. Wider interests would
do much to remedy these defects. If you want your wife
to be your toy, or your drudge, you do perhaps wisely in
shutting up her ideas within the four walls of your house
but if you want one who will stand at your side through
life, in evil report as well as in good, a strong, large-hearted
woman, fit to be your comfort in trouble, your counsellor in
difficulty, your support in danger, worthy to be the mother
of your children, the wise guardian and trainer of your sons
and your daughters, then seek to widen women’s intellects,
and to enlarge their hearts, by sharing with them your
grander plans of life, your deeper thoughts, your keener
hopes. Do not keep your brains and intellects for the
strife of politics and the conflicts for success, and give to
your homes and to your wives nothing but your condes
cending carelessness and your thoughtless love. Further, do
you look on women as your natural enemies, and suppose they
are on the look out for every chance of running away from
their homes and their children ? It says very little for you
if you hope only to keep women’s hearts by chaining their
minds, or limiting thezr range of action. What is it really
worth, this compelled submission—this enforced devotion?
Do you acknowledge that you make home-life so dull, sowearisome, that you dare not throw open the cage-door,
�12
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
lest the captive should escape ? Do you confess that your
service is so hard a one that she you call your friend
is only longing to be free? You do yourselves an injustice,
friends; you shame your own characters—you discredit
your homes. A happy home, the centre of hopes and
fears, the cherished resting-place from life's troubles, the
sure haven from life’s conflicts, the paradise brightened
by children’s prattle and children’s laughter—this home is
not a place where women must be chained down lest they
should run away. Admitting, however, for argument’s
sake, the absurd idea that women would neglect their
homes if they possessed the franchise, may I ask by what
right men restrict women’s action to the home? I can under
stand that, in Eastern lands, where the husband rules his wives
with despotic authority, and woman is but the plaything
■and the slave of man, woman’s sphere A the home, for the
very simple reason that she cannot get outside it. So, in
this sense, in the Zoological Gardens, is the den the sphere
of the lion, and the cage of the eagle. Shut any living
creature up, and its prison becomes its sphere. But if the
prisoner becomes restless—if nature beats strongly at the
captive’s heart—if he yearns for the free air and the golden
sunshine, you may, indeed, keep him in the sphere you
have built for him; but he will break his heart, and will
die in your hands. Many women now, educated more
highly than they used to be—women with strong brains
and loving hearts—are being driven into bitterness and
into angry opposition, because their ambition is thwarted
at every step, and their eager longings for a fuller life are
.forced back and crushed. A tree will grow, however you
may try to stunt it. You may disfigure it, you may force it
into awkward shapes, but grow it will. One would fain
hope that it is in thoughtlessness and in ignorance that
men try to push women back. Surely they do not appre
ciate the injury they are doing, both to themselves and to
women, if they turn their homes into prison-houses, and
the little children into incumbrances. In the strong, true,
woman there is a tender motherhood which weaker natures
cannot reach ; but if these women are to be told that
‘domestic cares only are to fill their brains, and the prattle
of children to be the only satisfaction of their intellect, you
run a terrible risk of making them break free from home
and child. Allow them to grow freely, to develop as nature
bids them, and they will find room for home-cares in their
�POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
13
minds, and the warmest nestling-place in their bosom will
be the haven of the little child. But if you check, and
fret, and carp at them, you will not succeed in keeping,
them back, but you will succeed in souring them, and in
making them hard and bitter. Oh, for the sake of English
home life—for the sake of the tender ties of motherhood—
for the sake of the common happiness, do not turn into
bitter opponents the women who are still anxious to be
your friends and your fellow-workers. This is no imaginary
danger; it is a thunder-cloud brooding over many English
homes. I can scarcely believe that men and women would
be so unreasonable as to make the power of voting into a
domestic annoyance. Of course, if a married couple want
to quarrel, there are sure to be plenty of differences of
opinion between them which will give them the proper
opportunity. But why should political disagreement be
specially fatal to domestic peace ? Theology is now a
fruitful source of disagreement. If the husband is the free
thinker, he does not suffer, because he does not allow his
wife to worry him too far ; but if the free-thinking is on the
side of the wife, matters are apt to become uncomfortable.
There is only one way to remedy this difficulty. Let the
husband feel, as the wife now does, that between two
grown-up people control of one by the other is an absurdity.
Bitterness arises now from disagreement, because the wife
who forms her opinion for herself is regarded as a rebel to
lawful authority. Remove the authority, which is a tyranny,
and people will readily “ agree to differ.” There will pos
sibly be a little more care before marriage about the opinions
of the lady wooed than there is now, when the man fancies
that he can mould the docile girl into what shape he
pleases, and the future happiness of both is marred if the
woman happens to be made of bright steel, instead of
plastic clay. In any case, Parliament is scarcely bound tp
treat one half of England with injustice, lest the other half
should find its authority curtailed.
One by one I have faced the only arguments against the
extension of the franchise to women with which I am ac
quainted. You yourselves must judge how far these argu
ments are valid, and on which side right and justice rest. I
would add that I feel sure that, when the matter is fairly
placed before them, most men will sympathise with, and
assist our cause. Some noble and brave men have come
forward to join our ranks already, and speak boldly for
�r4
POLITICAL STATUS OF WOMEN.
woman’s cause, and work faithfully for its triumph. The
mass of men only need to study our claims in order to
accept them. They have been reared to regard themselves
as our natural superiors; small blame to them that they
take the upper seats. Kind and gentle as many of them
•are, working hard for wife and children, thinking much of
women and loving them well, it cannot be expected that
they should readily understand that their relations to the
weaker sex are founded on an injustice. But if they want
to see how false is their idea of peace, and how misled
they are when they think women’s position satisfactory, let
them go out and see what the laws are where the power they
give is wielded by brutality and tyranny. Let them try to
imagine what women suffer who are too weak and timid to
resist the strength under whose remorseless exercise they
writhe in vain , let them try to appreciate the sharper agony
of those whose bolder hearts and stronger natures defy their
tyrants, and break, at. whatever cost, their chains. Laws
must be tested by their working ; these laws which make
the woman the helpless servant of man are not enforced in
happy homes; but they exist, and elsewhere they are
used.
Injustice is never good ; it is never even safe. There is
a higher life before us, a nobler ideal of marriage union, a
fairer development of individual natures, a surer hope of
wider happiness. Liberty for every human being, equality
before the law for all in public and in private, fraternity of
men and women in peaceful friendship, these are the promise
of the dawning day. Co-workers in every noble labour, co
partners in every righteous project, co-soldiers in every just
cause, men and women in the time to come shall labour,
think, and struggle side by side. The man shall bring his
greater strength and more sustained determination, the
woman her quicker judgment and purer heart, till man shall
grow tenderer, and woman stronger, man more pure, and
woman more brave and free. Till at last, generations
hence, the race shall develop into a strength and a beauty
at present unimagined, and men and women shall walk this
fair earth hand-in-hand, diverse, yet truly one, set each to
each—
“As perfect music unto noble words.3
�BOOKS BY ANNIE BESANT.
The Freethinker’s Text-Book.—Part II. By Annie Besant.—
“On Christianity.” Section I.— “ Christianity: its Evidences
Unreliable.” Section II.—“Its Origin Pagan.” Section III.—“Its
Morality Fallible.” Section IV.—“Condemned by its History.”
Bound in cloth, 3s. 6d.
History of the Great French Revolution.—By Annie Besant.
Cloth, 2s. 6d.
My Path to Atheism.—Collected Essays of Annie Besant.—The
Deity of Jesus—Inspiration—Atonement—Eternal Punishment_ Prayer—Revealed Religion—and the Existence of God, all examined
and rejected ; together with some Essays on the Book of Common
Prayer. Cloth, lettered, 4s.
Marriage: as it was, as it is, and as it should be. By
Annie Besant. In limp cloth, Is.
The Jesus 'of the Gospels and The Influence of Chris
tianity.—Verbatim Report of Two Nights’ Debate between the
Rev. A. Hatchard and Annie Besant, at the Hall of Science,
London. Is.
To be obtained of the Freethought Publishing Company,
28, Stonecutter Street, E.C.
�PAMPHLETS BY ANNIE BESANT.
The True Basis of Morality. A Plea for Utility as the Standard
of Morality...
...
...
...
...
q
Auguste Comte. Biography of the great French Thinker, with
Sketches of his Philosophy, his Religion, and his Sociology.
Being a short and convenient resumé of Positivism for the
general reader
...
...
...
...
.. q
Giordano Bruno, the Freethought Martyr of the Sixteenth
Century. His Life and Works
...
...
... 0
The Political Status of Women. A Plea for Women’s Rights ... 0
Civil and Religious Liberty, with some Hints taken from the
French Revolution ...
...
...
...
... q
The Gospel of Atheism ...
...
...
...
.. q
Is the Bible Indictable ? ...
...
...
...
... q
England, India, and Afghanistan ...
...
...
... q
The Story of Afghanistan
...
...
...
... 0
The preceding two pamphlets bound together in limp cloth, Is.
The Law of Population : Its consequences, and its Rearing upon
Human Conduct and Morals. Fortieth thousand
... 0
An additional twenty-five thousand of this have also been
printed in America, and translations have been issued and
widely sold in Holland, Italy, and France.
Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity...
...
...
.. 0
Landlords, Tenant Farmers, and Labourers
...
... 0
The God Idea in the Revolution ...
...
...
... 1
The Gospel of Christianity and the Gospel of Freethought
... 0
English Marseillaise, with Music ...
...
...
... 0
English Republicanism ...
...
...
...
... q
Essays, bound in one volume, cloth
...
...
... 3
Christian Progress
...
...
...
...
... q
The English Land System
...
...
...
... 0
Ethics of Punishment
...
...
...
...
... ()
Large Portrait of Mrs. Besant, fit for framing, 2s. 6d.
A splendidly executed Steel Engraving of Mrs. Besant, price 2d.
London : Fkeethought Publishing Company, 28, Stonecutter
Street, E.C.
d..
2
6
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
&
1
1
a
2
1
1
a
2
1
1
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The political status of women
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 3rd ed.
Place of publication: London
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Books and pamphlets by Annie Besant advertised on and inside back cover. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood [1847-1933]
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Freethought Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[188-?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N069
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The political status of women), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
NSS
Women-Suffrage
Women's Rights
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/39e6bbfdf1c7d90fb7f40dfd145c3325.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=Ep1DJMeCm50Nk7A1dQFrTnBqiR7giBCPugdgYFujjTXJ1t6cG8F2sf6noPk9mFHfDpwUsgeCwxjnhALSgrRKwc7AG7MYJ%7ElWnnL6uZ3XV1DF-LDE-XKNNMvRr4J8mOfkO1mHoKIHYcAQr3hoARARIU6Xtme26meZqDsECXugsb9xnYaRzVL6JLSd6BMHBV39XLMHqDubSbp%7EfIBG7h4u767Doi0wmx7xPtaKUFyALE66dExhfPH16RfMnNqjlf3hq-V0UJV0iwOzHN4Ebo6DXneHb2qf2o6WcQanowejN0YVrmR4S03G4nbhhN-LoILOtS0RUgcyPb4yxCoB4Jj9aQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0f82a26b12f247bc347d6d3822772b96
PDF Text
Text
I
VOL I., No. 2.—JUNE, 1870.
A VOICE FROM MEMORY.
WRITTEN
ON THE
24TH OF MAY, THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE DAY ON
WHICH ELLIS GRAY LORING DEPARTED FROM THIS LIFE.
BY L. MARIA CHILD.
Again the trees are clothed in vernal green,
Again the waters flow in silv’ry sheen ;
But all this beauty through a mist I see,
For earth bloomed thus when thou wert lost to me.
The flowers come back, the tuneful birds return;
But thou, for whom my spirit still doth yearn,
Art gone from me to spheres so bright and far,
Thou seem’st the Spirit of some distant Star.
Oh, for some telegram from thee, my friend !
Some whispered answer to the love I send !
Or one brief glance from those dear guileless eyes,
That smiled to me so sweetly thy replies.
My heart is hungry for thy gentle ways,
Thy friendly counsels and thy precious praise ;
I seem to travel in the dark alone,
Since thou, my wisest, truest guide, art gone.
And yet at times so near thou art to me,
That each good thought seems still inspired by thee.
I almost hear thee say, “Fear not, my friend!
Our friendship, pure and loyal, knows no end.”
vol. i.—5
�66
The Legal Status of Woman.
Oh, lead me ever nearer to thy sphere,
And guide and help me, as thou didst while here !
For still I lean on thy pure, faithful heart,
Angel or seraph, wheresoe’er thou art.
THE LEGAL STATUS OF WOMAN.
BY H. H. BOND.
Civilization in its development,
and laws in their consequent ad
vance, seem to go from one position
to another, each position in its turn
serving as a basis for the making of
still further inroads into the unde
veloped future. In the advance, the
different acts appear like little dots
along the line of the broad princi
ple in which they are at last absorb
ed ; and a step once taken, the same
advancing course is repeated.
In the status of woman, starting
from the firmly-established system in
which the central feature was the
legal absorption of the individuality
of woman in the status of man, the
law, as we have seen, has been con
stantly abandoning that position :
First, adding legal duties to balance
the husband’s legal rights, and re
stricting by degrees the latter ; next,
under the guise of fiction, avoiding
the effect of many of the strict legal
rules ; then, through a court of con
science, bringing many cases out
side of the legal system, and gra
dually extending these till equity had
“eaten out the heart of the law”
which belonged to a different age ;
and lastly, through legislation, ar
ranging and advancing the new or
der of things, till it has finally, in a
great measure, worked itself into a
new system, in which, if we may
judge from the tendency of the past
and the indications of the present,
the moving principle will be, the full,
individual equality of man and wo
man before the law.
We are led to this position not
only by the logic of legal progress,
but also by the logic of reason and
justice.
Laws, it will hardly be denied,
should carry out the principle upon
which a government is founded.
Says that great inquirer into the
spirit of laws, Montesquieu, “The
relation of laws to the principle of
government strengthens the several
springs of government ; and this
principle derives from thence, in its
turn, a new degree of vigor.”
Individuality is one of the funda
mental features of the principle upon
which our government is based, and
therefore one which should be recog
nized by our laws. Herein lies a
distinctive difference between the
ancient and modern state. Says
that profound thinker and writer
upon questions pertaining to the in
dividual and the state, Dr. Lieber,
“ One of the main and characteristic
differences between the ancient states
�The Legal Status of Woman.
ancl modern ones is this, that in an
tiquity the state nearly absorbed the
■ndividual rights and interests, and
public attention was directed far
more toward the preservation of the
whole than the protection of the in
dividual. Politics, however, estab
lished according to the point of view
which is taken in modern times,
places the protection of the indivi
dual, the individual rights of man, in
the most prominent position among
all the objects of the state.”
The individuality of man is a truth
which, though we regard it as self-evi
dent, is too often forgotten or unheed
ed in our laws, and will bear constant
reiteration. As an individual, man
has a certain destiny which leads to
individual responsibilities and their
complementary rights ; rights which
we consider as springing from the
nature of man, and hence natu
ral; rights which are not properly
the subject of ridicule or contempt,
but which are essential; rights which
are not to be arrogated by others,
but which are inalienable, or in
separably connected with the indi
vidual.
Among the first of these rights is
that of personality, or the right to be
recognized and treated as an indi
vidual. Any system which absorbs
this right is a system of slavery ;
and what else is that system which
“ demands that husband and wife be
recognized as one ”—one absorbing
the individuality of the other ? It
would seem, therefore, that “ decla
mation ” against this is not neces
sarily the “mere quibble? which the
author of Ecce Femina is pleased to
term it.
Again, we include the individual
•'right of property- among the natural
67
rights of man. We can hardly com
prehend how it is that a system which
denied this right to the individual wo
man to the extent it has done, has been
so tenaciously held to be just, when it
violated that which was deemed most
sacred to the individual man. Fully
carried out, this right covers a broad
field ; for with it are concerned nine
tenths of all laws. Political rights
from this gain a strong support.
There is sterling worth in the idea
which we see struggling through Eng
lish history, and becoming crystalliz
ed in the familiar maxim, “ No taxa
tion without representation.” Eng
land, especially, which, clings more
to the property theory of govern
ment, and where voting is often call
ed a vested right of property, is lo
gically led forward to the acknow
ledgment of woman’s right to the
ballot.
But further, each individual is en
dowed with an imperfect nature, the
development of which is a life-long
duty. Hand in hand with this re
sponsibility goes free-agency ; and to
each individual, therefore, belongs
the right to work out his or her own
manhood or womanhood in his or
her own way ; and upon every other
individual, number, or class of indi
viduals devolves the correlative duty
of, at least, placing no obstacles in
the way of this free development.
In this respect there has been a
prominent defect in the legal status
of woman. While not acknowledg
ing her to be wanting in reason and
judgment, the law has arbitrarily re
stricted her life to a narrow channel.
“ Her disabilities,” said an eminent
judge, “ come not from want of judg
ment, but from want of free-agency.”
This would seem to be answer
�68
The Legal Status of Woman.
enough to the oft-repeated objec
tion, which is by many deemed
most fundamental, that women do
not ask or wish for this or that.
Whether they ask for it or not, if it
be their right, there is the duty on
the part of every one else to see to
it that they place nothing in the way
of the exercise of that right.
It also meets the objections found
ed on the assumption that “society
is organized for and by the majority.”
If this were true, why is it that the
constitutional government of modern
times has come to mean a govern
ment that protects the individual
from power whether in one or many ?
There are rights which should be
carefully preserved from the uncer
tain will of that power which did
not hesitate to sentence a Socrates,
or to persecute and crucify a Sa
viour.
This, too, meets the attempt of
any person to rigidly mark out the
scope of another’s life. Each one
lives his own life, and is responsible
for the use of his own nature. The
ancient ordinances of Menu furnish a
text, which, as Dr. Lieber expressed
it, “ sounds like a passage from the
Bible“ single is each man born;
single he dieth ; single he receiveth
the reward of his good, and single the
punishment of his evil deeds.”
But, it is said, there is a radical
error in this mode of reasoning; be
cause society, instead of being a
union of individuals, is a union of
families. And then follows the very
plausible argument, that, “ as the law
recognizes the family as one, of
course there can be but one repre
sentative ; and as the husband,” etc.
etc. The importance of the institu
tion of the family is not questioned;
but the assumption that it is the
unit of society is not so readily
maintained. Absorb all individuali
ty in this family unit by the most
perfect theory that human language
can devise ; and when it is done, the
plain, practical fact, which, like Banquo’s ghost, will never down, rises
up to refute it, that the individual
yet remains. Have we, indeed, been
retrograding that the law has come
to reach down to the individual?
Barbarian law looked only to the
family, and every thing was con
sistently shaped in accordance with
that theory. But we have changed
this unit of fiction to the unit of fact.
The difference is forcibly expressed
by Professor Maine in the words,
“ The unit of an ancient society was
the family; of a modern society it is
the individual.”
Closely connected, and blending
with the individualism of modern
society, is the equality of individuals,
which is so essential a feature of our
polity, and which should, therefore,
also shape our laws. The “ all men
are created equal ” of our Declara
tion of Independence, and the fuller
expression, an outgrowth of the for
mer, “All men are equal by na
ture and before the law, in the
French Declaration of Rights, are
phrases that have a meaning in
them. To make these “glittering
generalities ” practical truths, is a
task for a high degree of civilization.
Caste, in one form or another, is
ever making some particular indivi
duals peculiar favorites of nature
and law. The Hindoo will give
ready ear to the doctrines of the
Christian till it is intimated that the
Pariah is his equal; but that is
something inconceivable to him!
�The Legal Status of Woman.
The Christian himself shook his
head, like the heathen, at the appli
cation of the same truth to the ne
gro. The law, therefore, makes the
(Pariah an outcast, and made the
African a slave. Something the
same has been the lot of woman.
Caste had decreed that she was infe
rior to man by nature, and she was
therefore made subordinate to him
by law. Modern civilization has
done much toward doing away with
the effects of caste, and bringing out
in a clearer light the principle of
equality. Every period has had
prominently before it some one of
the phases of this principle. At the
present day none is more prominent
than this: that natural rights know
of no distinctions of sex. This
phase has long remained in the
background, but is now coming to
take its proper place. And as it
does so, there is a demand that wo
men as well as men shall not be re
stricted by law from acting out their
full part in the play of life i a de
mand for a broader application of
the fundamental truth that all men
are equal by nature and before the
law.
To this equality there appears to
be no sound objection. Christianity
is of course made to oppose it; for
what reform is there that it has not
been made to oppose ? Yet one of
the great truths which Christianity
teaches is that of individual equality.
Physical and intellectual reasons are
continually adduced against it; but
only a half application is made of
them when they are applied to wo
men only; and are we at this late
day to make it a condition precedent
to the concession of rights that a
person should be a Hercules in
69
physical strength, or a Shakespeare
in intellectual vigor ? Then there is
made the objection of which men
have no reason to be proud, but
which may perhaps be a practical
one to most women, that woman
will, on account of it, lose the re
spect of men. Some women may
so act as to forfeit their claim to re
spect; but should, for example, Vic
toria be entitled to less respect as
a woman because she happens to
be Queen of England; or Florence
Nightingale because of her not
following the line marked out by
some worthy reverend ; or Mrs.
Stowe because of her having won
a respected name in literature ; or
ought any woman to be any less
worthy of respect because she may
happen to own property in her sepa
rate right, or be entitled to cast a
ballot if she chooses ? When driven
from one position to another, the
opponents of this equality, or some
of them, frankly admit that its ad
vocates have the argument, and then
intrench themselves in a last strong
hold, that the reasons which are op
posed are too deep and subtle for
expression. That position at most
is hardly satisfactory, and if safe
from attack, will not be apt to ob
struct the advance.
That a woman should be the legal
equal of man does not require that
she should forsake her own nature
and acquire his, any more than for
him to assume the feminine charac
teristics ; on the contrary, for men
and women to associate as equals—
to do which the law should recog
nize them as such—would seem na
turally to bring out the true nature
of each more perfectly. In so far
as they have come to be regarded as
�70
The Legal Status of Woman.
equals it has been for the good of
each, and for the benefit of the world
at large; and, at all events, a gov
ernment which founds itself upon
the theory that every citizen is, as
an individual, the legal equal of
every other, should be willing to give
its own theory a fair trial.
Innovations in behalf of woman
have heretofore been founded on the
theory of charity rather than that of
justice. Victor Hugo, through his
character of Javert, says, “ It is
easy to be charitable, but, O God ! it
is hard to be just !” There is a good
deal of meaning in that sentence,
and the status of woman is one of
the illustrations showing its truth.
Men arrogated to themselves the
control of the legal rights of wo
men, and then set up the claim that
it was out of pure charity, so great
a favorite was woman. If -women
were now and then favored with the
privilege of exercising a right, it was
discussed and treated as a cha
ritable action on the part of man.
But the moment there was a demand
made by woman for any thing as a
right, the demand was looked upon
as a presumption calling for manly
ridicule and contempt. It is well to
be able to feel that we have been
charitable, but it would be better to
be able to answer in the affirmative
the question, Have we been just?
Law deals in justice. And if the
proposition be correct that the rea
son of our law requires the con
sideration of individuals as equals,
justice certainly demands that this
principle be impartially carried out
in the legal status of woman.
It may perhaps be well to add
that, while we advocate this course
we have no picture to present of
millennial days to immediately en
sue upon its being carried out. We
have no anticipation of any such rej
suits. We imagine that we shall all
wake up from the change to recog
nize something of the same world,
and in it find the same hard battle
of progress to fight. It will only be
a new position taken which the pre
sent civilization seems to demand,
and which will be more favorable
than the old for a further advance.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The legal status of women
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bond, H.H.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [Chicago]
Collation: 66-70 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed in double columns. From The Standard, Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1870.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5439
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The legal status of women), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Women-Legal Status
Women's Rights
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/ff33fc0ebbdd66e5329033fd0da5edff.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=o2H8tvOwKzjRBmt8PdJ2aIfFeCiM41LsjUheGeBXsnrEjC3yH3MBAIEU5xwTWuO5kTDnmS4ndRvZo4an06oIi-a0QQxrOcAZhaPB5E8m5KHUup9pmT1taSvR2vsepOMalwWYJICdFU78HQj91j03HhCKwd59FDjEQ6RFNa%7EZ5kDc5uQ50PhF2FWcmEyFc0BT5zTBCDCnR-Zz9t02DmqIe-dh--RiDAPg6M4KUv6OToS09O3vYoQd9ujzXWVaR6lzwrOyfGR2cA0lGA-thIncToCaHcZyqjW1QBIPdDQevNlrQOxY2Dw8ieyNUozA45myhknchLy9Zoz4ZxpDGX-RjA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
108a0c296b70e90805ff11b496b1edfb
PDF Text
Text
DE
DES FEMMES
EN ANGLETERRE
PAR
MME C. COIGNET
PARIS
LIBRAIRIE GERMER BAILLlfiRE
RUE DE L’EC0LE-DE-m£DEC1NE, 17
1874
*
�Extrait de la Revue politique et litteraire
Numdros 44, 45. — 2 et 9 mai 1874
�DE
HmWHISSHMT POLITIQUE
DES FEMMES
Un des spectacles les plus interessants pt les plus curieux
de l’ordre politique est celui que nous presente aujourd’hui
TAngleterre.
En voyant ee peuple abandonner de plus en plus sa pre
ponderance en Europe et faire aux nations une sorts de
declaration da paix a tout prix, on a prononce parfois le
mot de decadence. L’exces du bien-Mre et des richesses,
a-t-on dit, et les satisfactions egoistes qui en ddrivent produisent, la commo partout ailleurs, leur effet d’atonie et d’engourdissement. Encore quelques annees, l’Angleterre sera
devenue une nouvelie Hollande. Mais ceux qui suivent d’un
mil plus attentif et plus penetrant la politique anglaise a l’interieur en appelleront de ce jugement,
Il est bien vrai que les traditions orgueilleuses qui ont
porU pendant des siecles le Royaume-Uni a s’arroger la
souverainetd des mers et la suprematie sur le continent, s’affaiblissent de plus en plus, ~ et la classe qui les avail si hardiment proclamdes et si hardiment soutenues perd cheque jour
de son prestige. La bourgeoisie est aujourd’hui preponde
rate en Angleterre, Or, les classes travailleuses ne sent ja
mais guerrieres; connaissant le prix des richesses acquires
�- Zl —
par leurs propres efforts, elles tiennent a la paix qui les con
serve, a la liberte qui leur permet d’en jouir, et preferent au
bruit du champ de bataille les luttes fecondes de la vie civile
et les joies du foyer. Peut-dtre la classe moyenne en Angleterre manque-t-elle encore de la culture superieure, des tra
ditions diplomatiques et des larges visees de la vieille aristocratie. Aussi, sous sa direction, le pays a trouve jusqu’a
present moins d’eclat exterieur que sous ses anciens chefs (1).
Mais cette meme classe peut acquerir ce qui lui manque, et
si d’ailleurs elle mtme a bonne fin 1’oeuvre qu’elle a entre
prise, — la reforme liberate des institutions, — l’Angleterre y
trouvera plus de vraie gloire que dans toutes les conqudtes.
Qu’on ne parle done pas de decadence. La vitalite de cette
forte race n’a nullement diminue; jamais, au contraire, son
energie et son activite n’ont ete aussi intenses; seulement
elles se concentrent a l’interieur.
Les questions politiques et sociales qu’on debat aujourd’hui
en Angleterre sont celles qui agitent 1’Europe moderne tout
entiere. Elles peuvent se ramener a une seule : la lutte d’un
monde nouveau fonde sur le droit humain, la liberte et l’egalite des individus, contre un vieux monde fonde sur le droit
divin, les privileges de classes et les pouvoirs ecclesiastiques.
Les diverses reformes obtenues dans le cours de ce siecle
en Angleterre (2), et celles qu’on v reclame encore aujour
d’hui (3), ne sont que les manifestations de cette lutte, et le
progres social s’y rattache en entier. Ddgager la societe mo-
(1) L’Angleterre peut remplir en Europe un grand role, sans viser
a la conquete. Nous esperons qu’elle le comprendra. L’abstention systematique et absolue serait trop aisement taxee d’egoisme, d’etroitesse
et d’impuissance. Un peuple ne saurait s’isoler du groupe auquel il
appartient et se desinteresser de la politique exterieure, sans voir diminuer, non-seulement son influence, mais sa valeur morale.
(2) Le mafiage civil, le libre echange, la suppression des brevets
achetes dans l’armee, la suppression du serment religieux a l’entree
du parlement et des universites, la reforme electorale, etc.
(3) La separation de l’Eglise et de l’Etat, l’enseignement public et
laique generalise, l’extension du suffrage, la libre possession et la libre
transmission de la terre, etc., etc.
�derne, laique et democratique, de la societe theologique et
aristocratique du moyen age : telle est la question dans tous
les pays. Mais il y a bien des manures de la resoudre, et ici
nous allons reconnaitre un des traits les plus caracteristiques
de l’esprit anglo-saxon.
Le progrds social en Angleterre n’apparait jamais comme
le fruit d’une revolution violente qu’un parti peut obtenir par
surprise et imposer par force. 11 est le resultat d’une trans
formation lente et reguli&re accomplie par la nation ellemfime. Chaque nouvelle reforme doit 6tre soumise a l’opinion; avant d’arriver au Parlement, elle doit avoir ete debattue
et acceptee par le peuple.
Or, chez cette race positive et fortement attachee a ses tra
ditions, il ne suftit pas qu’une reforme soit juste et conforme
a l’interfit du pays pour devenir populaire ; il faut encore
qu’elle ait un fondement dans la legislation, un precedent
dans l’histoire, qu’elle rentre en un mot dans le d6veloppement regulier des institutions.
Ce respect de la volonte nationale aussi bien dans les tra
ditions du passe que dans les tendances du present fait la force
morale de l’Anglelerre. Il eleve le patriotisme au-dessus de
toutes les divisions de classes et de partis, et, en donnant a
l’action politique la resistance, la force et la duree, il lui
donne une incomparable grandeur. L’esprit tradition'nel, si
puissant d’ailleurs en Angleterre, peut retarder parfois la reali
sation des reformes, mais neles fait pas 6chouer; il ne leur
presente jamais un obstacle qu’on ne puisse tourner ou
vaincre.
Dans un pays oil aucune loi n’a jamais ete abolie, aucun
code revise, et ou la jurisprudence se puise aussi bien dans
la coutume et l’equite que dans la loi ecrite, il ne saurait fitre
difficile au reformateur de maintenir un lien entre les temps.
La question qui va nous occuper aujourd’hui en est un
saisissant exemple.
�dertes, s’il est une reforme importante, une reforme qui
doive atteindre la societe dans ses ptofondeurs, c’est celle qui
consisterait a supprimer toute distinction l&gale entre les
sexes, et s’il est un pays ou une telle reforme semble devoir
rencontrer une opposition invincible, c’est celui de tous ou la
legislation a etabli dans le mariage le plus d’inegalites. C’est
pourtant dans celui-la, c’est en Angleterre que la question
est aujourd’hui posee et publiquement debattue, et qu’elle
gagne du terrain chaque jour.
Quand nous parions de supprimer toute distinction legale
entre les sexes, nous indiquons la question dans sa veritable
portee philosophique (t), non point telle que l’ont formulee
devant le public la masse de ceux qui la defendent. Fidfeles a
l’esprit et aux habitudes de leur contree, ils se sent places, au
contraire, sur un terrain essentiellement pratique : ils ont
restraint leur reclamation a un point precis et bien deter
mine, -sachant que c’est le meilleur moyen pour obtenir peu
a peu tout le reste.
Ce point est le droit politique.
Peut-6tre, en France, s’etonnera-t-on du choix; mais ils’explique en Angleterre, d’une part, par les habitudes du self
government, de l’autre, par les conditions speciales du droit
politique, qui v rendent le vote bien plus accessible aux fem
mes qu’il ne le serait chez nous.
Voici comment la question s’est determinee d’elle-mfime :
De nombreuses reformes etaient demandees touchant la
condition sociale des femmes en Angleterre, et la conve-
(1) M. Mill, un des principaux promoteurs du mouvement, l’a
posee ainsi dans son remarquable ouvrage sur VAssujettissement des
femmes.
�- 7 nance, la justice de CertainCs d’entre elles etaient gOtteralement reconnues. Les reformateufs alors ont dit :
« Si l’on doit reviser la legislation qui regie la condition de
la femme, n’est-il pas juste et dans l’esprit meme de notre
lol nationale que les femmes participent a cette revision ?
Ghacun est pouf Soi le meilleuf juge, et I’on rtd saurait chan
ger le sort de la moitie des membres de la commlihaute sanS
les consulter suf ce changement. t
Or, la seule maniore de consulter Idgalement les femmes,
c*est ’de leur accorder une part a la legislation au moyen du
vote.
Sans doute, s’il s’dtait agi d’ouvrir inopihement la vie po
litique a une nouvelle masse d’electeurs, on aurait pu recm
ler deVant un changemeht auSsl considerable, mais la ques*
tion ne se prdsentait point ainsi.
Le suffrage universel n’existe pas en Angleteffe. Le vote
y est eonsidPrd conime un privilege tenant a la propriety
bon comme un droit personnel attache A l’iftdividu. Toutes
les libertes publiques Oht Une origine traditionnelle; elles se
rattachent a ce vieil adage que ceux qui payent 1’impdt ont
un droit de controle suf ceux qui le levent et qui l’appliquent.
S’appuyant done sur le droit public ainsi determine, les
femmes ont demande le suffrage, non pas en tant que pefsonnes morales et civiles, be qui aufait pu btre sujet k con
testation, mais en tant que propriCtairos titulalresj pavant
rimpOt. La reclamation sous cette forme avalt le ddttble
avantage de restrelndre le hombre des nouveaux electeurs
aux feme sole (1) (demoiselles majeufos, et veuves), et de s’appuyer suf ie droit historique le plus ancidh.
(1) Expression de la loi normande pour designer les femmes qui
ne sunt nl en puissance de pefe, ni en puissance de marl. Il
faut remarqiier toutefois que, par le fait da Immigration, cette
eategorie est en Angleterre beaucoup plus nombreuse que chez
nous. Dans ce pays, le nombre des femmes depasse celui des hommes
d’un million environ, et on y trouve deux a trois millions de femmes
non mariees ou veuves. On a calcule que le jour ou la lol paSSetalt
elle augmenterait d’un septieme le nombre des dlecteilfs, Gette pro
portion est relativement considerable.,
�— 8 —
La loi salique, en effet, qui, dans notre pays et des l’epoque des Francs, excluait la femme de l’heritage paternel
comme incapable de le defendre, n’a jamais existe en Angle
terre. Les plus vieux souvenirs de cette contree nous montrent les filles heritant de leurs p&res a defaut des descen
dants males, et jouissant dans ce cas des mfimes droits que
ces derniers.
Avant mfime l’invasion normande, et sans cesse depuis,
les femmes possesseurs titulaires de fiefs prenaient part au
gouvernement de leur pays, tantOt par mandataires et tantot
d’une faqon directe.
Thomas Hughes, dans la Vie d'Alfred le Grand, nous dit
que les nobles dames, mfimes mariees, conservaient leurs proprietes personnelles, qu’elles pouvaient en disposer, et a ce
titre siegeaient dans le Wittenagamott, conseil national des
Saxons; elles siegeaient aussi dans les assemblees provin
ciates, les comites de paroisse, et elles etaient protegees par
des lois speciales alors que, dans ces temps de violence, la
faiblesse de leur corps les plagait en etat de peril,
Gurdon, dans ses Considerations sur les antiquites du parlement, parle aussi des femmes de naissance et de quality
qui siegeaient au conseil avec les chefs saxons.
L’abbesse Wilde, dit encore Bede, presida un synode-eccl6siastique.
Sous Henri VIII, dans-la salle Booth de Glocester, lady Anne
Berkeley tint une cour de justice comme juge-president. Elie
avait en cette qualite une commission du roi, et Fosbrook,
l’historien de Glocester, raconte comment elle vint, s’assit sur
le banc dans la salle des sessions publiques, presida le jury,
re§ut les temoignages, declara les accuses coupables de com
plot et de desordre public, et les condamna comme ennemis
du genre humain.
Sous Henri III, quatre abbesses furent convoquees au Parlement. Sous Edouard III, plusieurs dames nobles y comparurent par leurs mandataires. On cite encore mistress Copley,
sous le regne de Marie, et lady Packington, sous le regne
d’Elisabeth.
La derni&re manifestation publique que nous ayons de ce
droit date de I6Z1O; mais on peut voir que l’usage commence
�— 9 —
deja a s’affaiblir, carle sheriff fait alors cetteremarque qu’il
est honteux pour un homme d’etre elu par des femmes.
Dans le si£cle suivant, les juges le reconnaissent encore,
mais on n’en reclame presque plus l’application.
En 1739, la douzieme annee du regne de Georges II, devant
la cour du roi (kings' bench), sir William Lee etant premier
juge (chief justice) et sir Francis Page etant second juge, on
posa la question de savoir si une feme sole pouvait voter pour
les officiers de la paroisse, les sacristains, et si elle pouvait
elle-mtaie exercer ces fonctions. Dans le cours du proems, sir
William Lee d&clara que le droit etait incontestable, et qu’en
nombre de cas les feme sole avaient mdme vote pour les
membresdu Parlement, mais que, lorsqu’elles etaient marines,
leur mari devait voter pour elles. Le juge Page s’exprime
de la m6me faQon dans un cas analogue, et lord Coke, qui est
une autorite en ces matures, confirme ces dires.
Il nous reste d’ailleurs un temoignage vivant et plus ecla
tant que tous les autres de cette interpretation du droit feodal:
e’est la royaute qui en derive. Les femmes occupent le trdne
en Angleterre, et chaque terme de la loi qui en regie les
conditions est applicable a un sexe comme & l’autre. La reine
regnante remplit toutes les fonctions du roi; elle a les memes
prerogatives, les memes obligations. Bien plusj elle est en
Angleterre la seule epouse qui conserve la libertd de la feme
sole. Aprds comme avant le mariage, elle peut acheter,
vendre, recevoir des dons et des heritages, tester, et enfin
prendre toute sorte d’engagements.
Le droit traditionnel est done incontestable, et si l’usage
s’est perdu, il faut en accuser l’indifference des femmes, qui
n ont point ete assez jalouses de maintenir ce droit en l’exerqant. Toutefois, eten depit d’une telle negligence, le principe
n’en demeure pas moins comme un element de la constitu
tion et del’histoire du Royaume-Uni, et, en le relevant de nos
jours, en demandant a le remetlre en vigueur, les femmes
n’innovent pas, elles retournent ala tradition; ce point a
une grande importance.
Voici dans quels termes miss Mary Dowling (1), secretaire
(1) Miss Dowling, femme aussi distinguee par le caractere et par
�— 10 —
generale de 1’AsSociation en faveur du Suffrage des femmes,
determinait, au mois d’aofit 1873, l’objet de cette Association.
S’adressant att principal journaliste de la ville de Ramsgate,
ou devait se tenir un meeting sur cette question, elle s’exprimait en ces termes:
«Nous ne demandons pas, comtne quelques personnes se
l’imaginent vaguement, que chaque femme ait un vote. Mais
la proprfete, la rente et l’impdt etant la base des droits poll-*
1
tiques en Angleterre, nous disotts qtt’il est tres-injuste d’en
exclure les femmes qui sont proprietalres, rentieres, et qui
payent 1’impOt. Nous ne demandons nullement le droit de
vote pour les jeunes titles et les fipottses chargdes des devoirs
de la vie domestique, mais settlement pour les femmes dont
la situation civile peut 6tre assimifee it Celle des hottimes.
Nous demandons que les femmes non mariees et 16s Veuves
appelees a partager la charge de 1’impdt participent au privi
lege qui y est attache qttand le contribuable eSt un homme.
La question en litige n'est done point la question abstralte
des droits de la femme, sur laquelle les niembreS memes de
notre Association peuVent differer d’opinions, mais la ques
tion de savoir si la quality du sexe peut destituef du droit
politique tin membra quelconque de la communaute.
a J’ajouterai que nous avons sur ce point en notre faveur la
plus haute autorite legale du pays. Notre avocat general ltiimeme, sir John Coleridge, areconrtu en plelnParlement qtt’il
dtait difficile & uti Anglais de denier ttil tel droit (1). »
Nous ne pouvons qu’admlrer la sageSse et la moderation
d’un tel langage. La fermete dont les femmes anglaises
font preuve,en limitant leur reclamation au strict principe du
droit positif, est a nos yeux un gage certain de succes. On
verra d’ailleurs, en continuant cette etude, quelle matche regulfere et progressive la question a suivie. Nous la feprendrons au debut, stir le terrain legislatif.
le coeur que par les facultes de l’intelligence, a ete pCettiaturement
enlevee a sa tache et a 1’affection de ses amis, au mois de Janvier
4874. La cause a laquelle elle s’etait entierement Vouee a fait, par
cette mort, une grande perte.
(1) SPatice du le» tnal 1872.7 *'
�Le registre parlementaire d’Hansard nous donne, a la date
du 3 aoflt 4832, la premiere mention qui ait ete faite a la
Chambre des Communes du droit des femmes au vote poli
tique.
M. Hunt (1) se l&ve et dit qu’il a une petition a presenter,
laquelle sera peut-6tre un sujet de gaite pour les honorables
gentlemen, mais qui lui parait neanmoins meriter quelque
attention. Cette petition vient d’une dame de haut rang,
Mary Smith de Stanmore, du comte d’York. La petitionnaire
etablit que, possedant de grands biens, elle paye des taxes
considerables, et elle demande, selon le principe de la con
stitution anglaise, a participer al’election de ceux qui reprdsentent lapropriete. Elle ajoute que les femmes etant sujettes
a tous les chatiments de la loi, sans excepter la mort, il lui
parait juste qu’elles ne demeurent pas etrangeres a la legis
lation. Et pourtant, ajoute-t-elle, non-seulement elles en sont
exclues, mais quand elles ont a subir un jugement, elles ne
reconnaissent personne de leur sexe parmi les jures et les
juges. La petitionnaire ne voit aucune bonne raison pour
refuser aux femmes les droits sociaux, em Angleterre surtout oil la plus haute fonction de l’Etat, celle de la royautb,
peut dtre exercee par une femme, et elle termine en deman
dant que toutes les femmes non mariees ou veuves se trouvant d’ailleurs dans les conditions legales, puissent voter
pour les membres du parlement.
M. Hunt ne se mdprenait pas en prevoyant le peu de succes de cette petition. Elle fut ecartee sans discussion, mais
non sans quelques sourires des-honorablesgentlemen.—
A cette dpoque, d’ailleurs, l’opinion n’avait point encore
(1) Miiiistre de la marine dans ie cabinet actufel.
�— 12 —
ete saisie, et cet acte isole passa pour une excentricit6 sans
valeur et sans consequence.
C’est seulement treize ans apres que la question apparait
dans le public avec un certain eclat, relevee et soutenue par
deux noms populaires : M. Richard Cobden et M. Stuart Mill.
Dans un discours ala date du 15 janvier 18Zt5, a CoventGarden, M. Cobden se prononce en faveur du suffrage des
femmes (1), et l’annee suivante, M. Stuart Mill, dans un ouvrage politique sur la nature du gouvernement, se prononce
a son tour avec non moins de fermete dans le mdme sens.
Des cette epoque, on peut prevoir 1’attitude resolue que
M. Mill prendra plus tard dans la lutte.
L’appui de noms aussi estimes et aussi populaires com
mence a donner a la question une importance nouvelle.
Cependant le progres est lent, et c’est seulement douze ans
apres qu’un incident la remet en lumiere, sans amener encore
de resultats positifs.
En 1858, les ouvriers de Newcastle, avant forme une asso
ciation en faveur du suffrage universel, demanderent a un
groupe de femmes distinguees et liberates de se joindre a
eux et d’appuver leurs reclamations.
Celles-ci proposerent alors d’unir la question du vote des
femmes a celle du suffrage universel. Mais les ouvriers, tout
en admettant le principe, craignirent de compromettre leur
cause par cette union, et les pourparlers n’eurent pas de
suite.
En 1865 seulement, a l’epoque des elections, la question
revint devant le public avec un eclat nouveau. Les electeurs
de Westminster avaient propose la candidature a M. Mill.
« J’ecrivis en reponse, nous dit-il dans ses Memoires, une
lettre destinee a la publicite. Au sujet des droits electoraux,
je leur declarai peremptoirement que dans ma conviction,
conviction a laquelle je conformerais mes actes, les femmes
(1) « C’est un fait singulier a mes yeux, dit M. Cobden, et une
grande anomalie, que les femmes ne puissent pas voter elles-memes
quand, en nombre de cas, elles peuvent conferer le vote. Je souhaite
pour mon compte que leur droit finisse par etre reconnu. »
�avaient le droit d’etre representees dans le parlement sur le
meme pied que les hommes. C’etait sans doute la premiere
fois que cette doctrine s’afflrmait devant des electeurs an
glais. Aussi le succes de ma candidature, apres cette decla
ration de principe, a-t-elle donne l’impulsion au mouvement,
devenu depuis si vigoureux, en faveur du suffrage des
femmes » (1).
On remarque, en effet, que l’annee suivante, en 1866,
M. Mill put deja presenter, a la chambre des Communes une
petition de 1500 femmes pour demander le suffrage.
Dans cette curieuse seance, M. Disraeli, chef du parti conservateur,serailie a l’idee generale contenue dans la petition.
Il s’exprime en ces termes :
« Dans un pays gouverne par une femme, alors que nous
reconnaissons aux femmes le droit de former une partie de
l’Etat en qualite de pairesses de leur propre chef, alors que
nous admettons, non-seulement qu’elles possedent la terre,
mais qu’elles soient dames de manoir (Lady of the manor} et
tiennent des cours de justice, quand elles peuvent Otre gardiennes de l’Eglise etsurveillantesdespauvres, je ne saurais
voir par quelle raison on les exclurait du droit de vote. »
(Hansard’s Parliamentary debates.}
En 1867, M. Mill presenta une seconde petition de 12 2Zi7
personnes, hommes et femmes, et, de plus, un bill ou projet
de loi, en faveur de la reforme. Voici dans quels termes il
posa alors la question:
« Je me l&ve, messieurs, pour proposer une extension du
suffrage qui ne saurait exciter aucun sentiment de classe
ou de parti, qui ne peut pas plus donner'd’ombrage aux par
tisans les plus absolus des droits de la propriety qu’aux defenseurs les plus ardents des droits du nombre ; une exten
sion qui ne troublera pas dans la moindre mesure ce qu’on
appelait derni&rement la balance des pouvoirs politiqu.es, qui
(1) Histoire de ma vie, par Mill, p. 269.
�n'alarmera ni les adverspires leg plus craintifs de la revolu
tion, ni leg ddmocrates les plus jalouxdes droits populates,,,
La question que je yous adresse est celle-ci; Est-il juste de
refuser a une moitie des membres de la communaute, nonseulement l’exercice, mais la capacite d’exercer jamais les
droits politiques, alors que ces membres se trouvent dans
toutes les conditions legales et constitutionnelles qui suffiseut
auxautresmembres?.., La justice, qui represente a mes yeux
un groupe particulier d'intdrdts, n'exige pas sans doute qu’on
confere les fonctions politiques a chacun, mais elle exige
qu’on n’en destitue arbitrairement personne. Or, peut-on
prdtendre que des femmes qui administrent leurs biens per
sonnels, possfcdent et exploitent la terre, conduisent des
fermes, des maisons d’affaires et des dtablissements d’dducation, sont chefs de famille et paient des impots conside
rables, restent incapables de remplir une fonction a l’exer
cice de laquelle tout homme, quel qu’il soil, peut fitre ap’
pele?.,.Etce n’est pas seulement le principede la justice qui
est violepar cette exclusion des femmes,entant que femmes,
c’estnotre constitution m£me. La vieille doctrine sur laquelle
elle est fondee, doctrine chere a tousles liberauxetreconnue
par tous les conservateurs, n’est-elle pas contenue dans cette
maxime que I'impdt et la representation sont coeioistants ?
Or, cette maxime est violee par 1’exclusion des femmes. »
M. Mill examine ensuite tous les arguments eontraires au
projet de loi, arguments qu’on tire des obligations de la
femme dans la vie privee, et il ajoute : « Qu’est-ce done que la
liberty politique, sinon le controle de ceux qui exercent
directement les. fonctions publiques par ceux qui ne les exer
cent pas? Ce contrble est-il done de nature h absorber
l’existence, pour qu’on le declare incompatible avec les soins
de la famille et ses obligations ? Si Ton est sincere, on ponrra
peut-dtre rdduire cos arguments h un sentiment obsenr et
honteux de lui-mdme, que nous traduirons ainsi: — Une
femme n'a pas le droit d’etre autre chose que la servante la
plus utile et la plus devouee d’un homme. — J’ajouterai que,
dans ma conviction, il n’y a pas un seul mernbre de cette
Chambre capable d’un sentiment si bas. »
A la suite de ce discours, le bill obtint 82 voix: la plupart
�appartenaient au parti radical (1). Quglques conservateurs
cependant suivirent l’exemple de M. Disraeli, au nona de la
tradition constitutionnelle, et voterent comme
pour le
bill.
Ainsi, chose curieuse 1 la question du drbit politique des
femmes est entrde sur le terrain legislatif appuyde par les
chefs des deux partis les plus opposes da la Chambre, at grace
a I’honorable minority qu’elle obtint, on peut dire qu’elle y
conquit ce jour-la sa place offlcielle. On pouvait encore la
combattre, mais on ne pouvait plus la traiter de chimeyique
et d’absurde.
Cette meme annbe, un incident se prhsenta qui permit de
faire en sa faveur, et sous une autre forme, une tentative
nouvelle,
La loi ecrite, en Angleterre, se sert du terme person
(personne) pour designer quiconque possede certains droits,
ou est sujet a certaines obligations. Or, dans un eas
particulier, un juge ayant decide que le mot person ntetait
point applicable aux femmes (2), on avait senti le danger
d’une jurisprudence qni aurait flni par dispenser les femmes
de tous les impbts si on l’avait ghnhralishe, et, pour parer M
la possibility d’un tel abus, lord Romilly avait presente une
loi, votee sans discussion par la chambre des Communes,
qui decidait que le terme legislatif de person etait egalement
applicable aux deux sexes, a moins que l’intention contraire
n’ait ete clairement exprimee par le legislateur.
L’annee suivante nbanmoins, en 1867, quand on vota la
re forme electorale, entraine par l’usage, on employe encore
(1) Les radicaux representent la partie la plus avancee du parti
liberal, Ce terme, toutefois, n’iniplique aucune signification revolutionnaire. Tous les partis politiques, a la chambre des Communes,
sont constitutionnels.
(2) Voici quel etait ce cas: Le dernier due de Buckingham avait
cite quelques chasseurs devant la justice pour fait de braconnage a
Stowe. Ceux-ci furent condamnes a Tamende, et, par vengeance, ils
attaquerent de la meme facon la duchesse pour avoir chasse le faisan
sans permis. Les magistrats decidferent que pour les permis de chasse,
la loi, employant le mot de person et le pronom he (il), n’etait pas
applicable aux femmes.
�le terme person pour designer les votants, sans deter
miner le sexe. Les partisans du suffrage des femmes ne devaient pas manquer de se prevaloir de cette inadvertance;
voici comment ils procederent:
Les listes electorales, en Angleterre, sont dressees par les
municipalites et revisees par un avocat de la couronne qui,
dans le cas ou les inscriptions ne lui paraissent pas conformes a la loi, peut effacer d’office les noms inscrits. Ses
decisions toutefois ne sont pas souveraines; il y a une cour
d’appel.
En 1868, l’annee qui suivit la reforme, quand les nouvelles
listes furent dressees, nombre de femmes se presentdrent
pour etre inscrites comme electeurs. Il y eut des cas ou les
officiers municipaux consentirent a cette inscription, d’autres oil ils la refuserent, et il y eut aussi des cas ou les avocats de la couronne ratifierent l’inscription municipale, d’autres ou ils effacdrent d’office les noms de femmes.
Dans tous les districts oil les noms furent maintenus sur
la liste, les femmes purent voter ; et de fait, elles voterent.
On cite entre autres le district de Finsbury, a Londres, ou
cinq femmes voterent. A Worcester, il y en eut une ; a Ash
ford, dans le comte de Kent, il y en eut vingt; il y en eut
dans beaucoup d’autres. La validite de ces votes n’a jamais
ete contestee.
La question neanmoins restait pendante. Il fallait la resoudre sur le terrain legal. On s’entendit a cet effet.
A Manchester, cinq mille femmes enregistrees comme elec
teurs avaient vu leurs noms rayes d’office par l’avocat de la
couronne; elles en appelerent, et leurs reclamations furent
portees devant la Cour.
Malheureusement pour la cause, il se trouva dans la faqon
dont les reclamations furent presentees un incident qui la
compromit.
On se rappelle que l’objet des deux dernidres reformes
electorales, celle de 1832 et celle de 1867, avaient ete d’etendre le droit de vote de la propriete a la rente. Il y avait dans
le principe de cette reforme un element qui paraissait une
derogation a la pure tradition constitutionnelle, etle parti
conservateur ne l’avait acceptee qu’avec repugnance, contraint
�17 —
par l'opinion publique. Or, le corps de la magistrature, ©n
Angleterre, y compris les avocats et les avoues, appartenant exclusivement au parti conservateur, on pense que
si les reclamations avaient ete presentees a la Cour au nom
des femmes proprietaries "conformement a l’ancienne loi,
elles avaient chance d’etre accueillies.
Malheureusement, la premiere petition inscrite venail
d’une femme rentiere, et on dut statuer en se plagant au
point de vue de la reforme. Les juges etaient naturellement peu enclins a etendre les applications d’une loi dont
ils n’approuvaient pas le principe; ils rejeterent done la
requfite et decidbrent que le mot person, employe fortuitement par le legislateur, ne comprenait pas dans son esprit
les deux sexes, mais les hommes seulement.
Ce jugement, qui enveloppait en masse toutes les reclama
tions, avait force de loi, et c’est la premiere decision legale
qui ait exclu les femmes du vote politique en Angleterre.
Malgre cet echec, le mouvement ne fut pas arrdte, car
les annees suivantes un nombre de petitions comprenant, en
1868, Zt9 780 signatures, en 1869, 56A75, puis 13Z| 561, puis
186 976, puis 355 806, furent successivement presentees a la
Chambre.
En 1869, M. Mill n’avait pas ete reelu, mais M. Jacob
Bright, frere de John Bright quaker et membre du ministbre, avait repris au Parlementla defense de la meme cause,
et, en attendant qu’il presentat un nouveau bill, il obtenait
de la Chambre, en faveur de l’intervention des femmes dans
la vie publique, les decisions les plus importantes. Il obte
nait le droit de vote dans les elections municipales, dans
l’election des officiers de police, des comites d’hygiene, des
gardiens des pauvres et, l’annee d’apres, en 1870, quand on
discula la loi de l’inslruction primaire, l’election et l’eligibilite dans les school-boards (1).
(i) Les school-boards sont des comites locaux qui organisent, administrent et gouvernent l’enseignement primaire dans chaque district.
Ce ne sont pas seulement des comites scolaires, mais de veritables
pouvoirs qui decident de la creation des 6coles et forcent les conseils
municipaux a lever les taxes necessaires a ce sujet. Ils decident, en
2
�— 18 —
En outre, la m6me annee, 11 presenta un nouveau bill qui,
apres avoir dte renvoye devant une commission par une majorite de circonstance (la Chambre n’etait pas en nombre),
fut ensuite rejete par un autre vote de surprise (1). La dis
cussion parlementaire se trouvait ainsi close jusqu’a la fin
de 1’annee ; mais la semaine suivante un grand meeting fut
tenu a Londres, dans lequel on decida avec enthousiasme de
continuer la lutte jusqu’au jour du succes.
En 1871, en effet, la question, qu’on n’avait pas cesse d’agiter devant le pays, revient devant le Parlement, et on peul
encore constater ses progres de deux manieres : d’abord par
le nombre des votes, qui s’elevent de 9Zi ou de 124 a 151; puis
par l’attitude tres-differente du cabinet. M. Gladstone, au lieu
de s’opposer personnellement au bill, laisse entendre, dans
un langage toutefois assez obscur, qu’il n’est pas loin d’en
admettre le principe. Il croit.le moment premature, car le
vote a bulletin ouvert donne lieu a de telles scenes de vio
lence que la presence des femmes ne pourrait y £tre
supportee. Mais une fois le vote secret adopte, la situa
tion sera tres-differente (2). «Les adversaires du bill,
dit M. Gladstone, lui opposent cette grande loi de la race
humaine en vertu de laquelle les travaux et les devoirs
de la vie domestique incombent ala femme, etles travaux et
les devoirs exterieurs incombent a l’homme; mais ils oublient que cette loi se modifie chaque jour sous l’empire des
faits. Le nombre de femmes independantes vivant soil de
outre, si l’enseignement sera obligatoire dans le district et s’il sera
la'ique ou religieux. Les femmes peuvent y etre elues, alors meme
qu’elles ne paient pas de cote personnelle et sont mariees. La pre
miere election qui s’est faite apres le vote de la loi a introduit sept
femmes dans les school-boards ; la seconde, qui a eu lieu a la fin de
1873, huit pour l’Angleterre et vingt-quatre pour l’Ecosse.
(-1) La majorite lors du premier vote etait de 124 contre 94. Lorsque }e bill revint pour la seconde fois devant la Chambre, M. Glad11
chef du gouvernement, s’y opposa ouvertement et le fit rejeter
en provoquant un vote subit a une heure du matin, auquel prirent
part tous les deputes faisant partie du gouvernement. On remarqua
que 58 deputes qui avaient vote pour le bill la premiere fois etaient
alors absents.
(2) Depuis cette. epoque le vote secret a ete adopte.
�— 19 —
leur propre fortune, soit de leur propre travail, augmente
chaque annee, surtout dans les grandes grilles. Or, on ne
saurait contester que ces femmes, en assumant la responsamlite de leur propre existence, assument en mdme temps
ioutes les charges qui appartiennent d’ordinaire exclusive*
ment aux hommes, et elles les assument dans des conditions
plus difficiles que leurs puissants competiteurs. Il y a dans
ce fait une inegalite et une injustice qu’aucun de nous ne
peut contester. Il est done certain qu’il y a des rdformes h
faire. »
En 1872 et en!873,le bill revient au Parlement et obtient
la dernidre annee un gain de Z|, voix (155). C’est un faible
progrSs, niais on se trouve en face de la mCme Chambre.
C’est M. Jacob Bright, M. Eastwick et M. Fawcett qui ont
remplacd M. Stuart Mill dans la defense de la cause.
« On discute, dit M. Fawcett, la question de savoir si les
femmes sont plus ou moins capables que les hommes de
prendre part a un gouvernement representatif: je repondrai
que nous n’en savons tien, que nous ne pouvons rien en
savoir avant l’experience. Mais je dis qu’il est contraire aux
principes de ce gouvernement et contraire a la justice d’imposer des lois a certains membres de la communautd sans
leur donner en mfime temps le pouvoir de contrdler ces lois.
Un grand nombre de mes amis me disent qu’ils ne voteront
pas pour le bill parce qu’ils pensent que l’intervention des
femmes augmentera la force du parti conservateur et celle
de 1 Eglise. Je n admets pas mdme qu’on pose cette question.
Si les femmes sont favorables a l’Eglise, elles en ont le droit,
et nous devons prendre leur opinion en consideration,
quelles que soient nos sympathies. »
« On a donne le vote aux femmes dans les conseils municipaux et les school-boards, dit M. Jacob Bright, parce que, a-t-on
dit, elles sont interessees autant que les hommes aux ques
tions d’education et aux questions d’administration locale.
Mais ne pouvons-nous pas employer le mdme argument
quand il s’agit de la representation generale du pays? Est-il
une seule de nos lois qui ne les interesse d’une fa§on directe
ou indirecte? On nous demande d’etendre le vote dans les
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
De l'affranchissement politique des femmes en Angleterre
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Coignet, C. (Clarisse)
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Paris
Collation: 46 p. ; 22 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From La Revue Politique et Litteraire, vol. 10 44-45: 2, 9 May 1894. Includes bibliographical reference.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Librairie Germer Bailliere
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1874
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G405
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (De l'affranchissement politique des femmes en Angleterre), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
French
Conway Tracts
Women-Suffrage
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9ef2513a32470b055f47e0c750360aad.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=tH7QbOizPXyFDL4KdV0HaudwrfMJYRS-RwcWQzzqNrNx5sM41GIlly%7ENZr-yM12nyiP6f%7EJptgzldw3Fdd4XPjgsclgEuJDq1bBSgKhjQKtOJv4A13h7UfqiWnLj8yOlh32zjRYGURHvH8li623NKveTzcexJwvgjHB8Csuiquv4NWMWEtUF93BH92fk2n%7EB5Mb7NHj8cO-nR6VNDthJulxZbivXy%7EAAZdD-TTGuTlzNRD5%7EjNyuH-7QJwVIxytnayqSqhzLGfeIhvgfdAxNEmaTPtUZxnLeL5AIL5r8eRZ5HS4JuR-WO4ogXC1TqThZ6Ay4cSU6u4A8syHOjqrGrg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
3023519d8f803c92f8f5911fd745827d
PDF Text
Text
THE SUBJECTION OF WOMEN.
*
BY AUGUSTE
COMTE.
< BOUT the close of the year 1841 a correspondence Began be/
tween Mr. John Stuart Mill and M. Auguste Comte. It be/ \ came at once very cordial and friendly and continued so for
some years. Mr. Mill accepted the method formulated by M.
Comte in the “ Cours de Philosophie positive.” This acceptance was
complete and remains so up to the present. Agreement on this point
is the first and most essential; without it nothing can be accom
plished ; with it, everything. But while such was his relation to the
method, it was wholly different as to the doctrine. Mr. Mill reserved
this for future contemplation. Very much of it reflection and more
extended observation have shown him to be well-founded, and to that
part of it he has given his most unqualified adhesion. We may cite,
among other things, M. Comte’s view of human evolution; of the
philosophical limits of the sciences; and of their concatenation into a
series, which are perhaps the most important of “ positive ” doctrines.
There were other points, however, on which the English philosopher
dissented—a dissent prolonged up to the present time. Such are the
study of economic conditions as a separate science—the present politi
cal economy; the study of the intellectual functions apart from their
cerebral organs—the present psychology ; and the social condition of
women.
Mr. Mill has very recently devoted an entire work, or rather pam
phlet, to the advocacy of his views on the relations of the sexes, with
reference both to the family and to the social organism. Very few (we
think) can read the letters, here for the first time presented to the
English speaking public, without perceiving that “ The Subjection-of
Women”! embodies, in great part, a substantial, if not an exact re
production of the opinions and arguments communicated so many
years ago to M. Comte. As far as the constitution of th'e positive
philosophy is concerned, this question is of wholly minor importance;
it can be decided either way without affecting its integrity. It is, how
ever, the fundamental question in social statics without which that
half of the science of sociology cannot be constituted; while the lively
* Discussion with Mr. J. S. Mill on the social condition of women,
f London, 1869 ; and New York, 1870.
22
�172
THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
sension about the condition and social destination of women, the more
suitable does it appear to me to characterize profoundly the deplorable
mental anarchy of our time, by showing the difficulty of a sufficient
present convergence even among the minds of the elite, between whom
there already exists, beside native sympathy, a logical harmony so pro
found as ours, and which, nevertheless, diverges, at least for the moment,
on one of the most fundamental questions which sociology can agitate;
upon the principal elementary base, to speak correctly, of all true so
cial hierarchy. Such a spectacle might even be enough to inspire a
kind of philosophical despair upon the final impossibility, as the relig
ious spirits pretend, of constituting a true intellectual concord upon
purely rational bases, if on the other hand a profound habitual estima
tion of our mental state, and even a sufficient personal experience, did
not tend to clearly convince me that the present position of your mind
constitutes in this respect only a necessarily temporary phase, the last
indirect reflection of the great negative transition. All thinkers who
seriously love women otherwise than as charming toys, have, in our
day, passed, I believe, through an analogous situation; on my own part,
I recollect very well the time when the strange work of Miss Mary
*
Wollstonecraft (before she espoused Godwin) produced a very strong
impression upon me. It was even chiefly by laboring to elucidate for
others the true elementary notions of domestic order, that I put my
mind, about twenty years, irrevocably beyond the pale of all similar
surprises of sentiment. I have no doubt that my special estimation of
this fundamental principle in the work which I am about commencing,
will suffice to dissipate, in this relation, all your uncertainties, if, before
this moment, your own meditations 'do not. essentially antedate this
important demonstration, on which we can prematurely talk a little in
our fraternal interview. In resuming summarily the indications of
your last letter, I hope that our spontaneous concert is less distant than
I at first feared. Although acknowledging the anatomical diversities
which more than anything else separate the feminine organism from
the great human type,f I think you have not allowed them a strong
enough physiological participation, while you have perhaps exaggerated
the possible influence of exercise, which, before everything, necessarily
supposes a suitable constitution. If, according to your hypothesis, our
cerebral apparatus never reached its adult state, all the exercise imag
inable would not render it susceptible of the high elaborations that it
ends by admitting of; and it is to this that I attribute the avortement,
too frequent in our day, of many unhappy youths who are exercised at
tasks repulsive to their age. Women are in the same category. In a
methodical discussion, I will have little to add to your judicious esti*“A Vindication of the Rights of Women, with strictures on political and moral
subjects.” London, 1792.
t As Littre remarks, this expression is not well chosen; “ human nature has no
human type which is independent of woman. The human ty pe can never, physically
or morally, be conceived but as double; it comprises two inseparable parts.”
�THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
173
naation of the normal limits of their faculties; but I find that you do
not attach sufficient importance to the real consequences of such native
inferiority. Their characteristic inaptitude for abstraction and construc
tion, the almost complete impossibility of rejecting emotional inspiration
in rational operations, though their passions are in general more gen
erous, must continue to indefinitely interdict them from all immediate
supreme direction of human affairs, not only in science or philosophy
as you allow, but also in esthetic life and even in practical life, as well
industrial as military, in which the spirit of consequence (de suite)
constitutes assuredly the principal condition of prolonged success. I
believe that women are as improper to direct any great commercial or
manufacturing enterprise as any important military operation; with
stronger reason are they radically incapable of all government, even
domestic, but only of secondary administration. In any case, neither
direction nor execution being suitable to them, they are essentially re
served for consultation and modification, in which their passive position
permits them to utilize very happily their sagacity and their character
istic * actuality.’ I have been able to observe very closely the feminine
organism, even in many eminent exceptions. I can further, on this
subject, mention my own wife, who, without having happily written
anything, at least up to the present, really possesses more mental force
than the greater number of the most justly praised persons of her sex.
I have everywhere found the essential characters of this type, a very
insufficient aptitude for the generalization of relations, and for persist
ence in deductions as well as in the preponderance of reason over pas
sion. All the cases of this kind are, in my eyes, too frequent and too
pronounced, to permit the imputation of difference of results chiefly
to diversity of education; for I have met with the same essential attri
butes where the whole surrounding influences had certainly tended to de
velop as far as possible an entirely different disposition. After all, is it
not otherwise in many respects a final advantage rather than a real incon
venience for women, to have been saved from this disastrous education
of words and entities which, during the great modem transition, has
replaced ancient military education ? As to the Fine Arts especially,
is it not evident that for two or three centuries, many women have
been very happily situated and trained for the cultivation, without ever
having been able, nevertheless, to produce anything truly great—no
more in music or painting than in poetry ? By a more profound es
timation of the whole field, one is, I think, led to recognize that this
social order so much execrated is radically arranged, on the contrary,
Sb as to essentially favor the proper scope of feminine qualities. Des
tined, beyond the maternal functions, to spontaneously constitute the
domestic auxilaries of all spiritual power, in supporting by sentiment
the practical influence of intelligence to modify morally the natural
reign of material force, women, are more and more placed in the condi
tions most proper for this important mission, by their isolation itself
�174
-THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
from active specialties which facilitates a judicious exercise of their
kind and moderating influence, at the same time that their own inter
ests are thus connected necessarily with the triumph of universal mo
rality. If it were possible that their position could change in this
respect and that they could become the equals of men instead of their
companions, I believe that the qualities which you justly attribute to
them would be much less developed. Their small instantaneous sagac
ity would become, for example, almost sterile, as soon as, ceasing to be
passive without being indifferent, they would have to conceive and di
rect, in place of regarding and counselling without serious responsi
bility. Besides, for truly positive philosophers, who know how, in all
cases, our systematic influence must be limited to wisely modify the ex
ercise of natural laws, without ever thinking of radically changing
their character and direction proper, the immense experience al
ready accomplished, in this respect, by the whole of humanity must
be, it seems to me, fully decisive; for we know the philosophical
worth of the theatrical declamations on the pretended abuse of force
on the part of the males. Although anatomical estimation has not
yet sufficiently established the explicit demonstration of the organic
superiority of our own species over the rest of animality, which has,
indeed, only very recently become possible, physiological research has
left no doubt upon the point, according to the single fact of the
progressive ascendancy obtained by man.
It is nearly the same in the question of sexes, though to a much less
degree; for how can the constant social subordination of the female sex
be otherwise explained ? The singular emaute organized in our day for
the benefit of women, but not by them, will certainly in the end only
add confirmation to this universal experience, although this grave in
cident of our anarchy may otherwise for the moment produce deplora
ble consequences, either private or public. The mass of our species
was for ages everywhere plunged in a social condition much inferior in
every way to that over which some now lament in women; but it has
been, since the beginning of the Middle Ages, gradually abandoned
among the most advanced peoples, because this collective subjection, a
temporary condition of ancient sociability, did not really belong to any
organic difference between the dominant and the dominated
*
But, .
on the contrary, the social subordination of women will be necessarily
indefinite, although progressively conformed to the normal universal
type, because it directly reposes upon a natural inferiority which
nothing can destroy, and which is even more pronounced among men
than among the other superior animals. By rendering women con
tinuously more suitable to their true general destination, I am con
vinced that the modern regeneration will more completely recall them
to their eminently domestic life, from which the disorder inseparable
See, on this illustration relative to the question of serfdom and slavery further
on in the third letter, p.
�THE
SUB JE C T T 0 N
OF
WOMEN.
175
from the great modern transition has, I think, momentarily turned
their attention in divers secondary respects. The natural movement
of our industry certainly tends to gradually turn over to men profes. sions for a long time carried on by women, and this spontaneous dispo
sition is, in my eyes, only one example of the growing tendency of our
sociability, to interdict women from all occupations which are not suf
ficiently reconcilable with their domestic destination, the importance
of which will become more and more preponderant. This is very far,
as you are aware, from interdicting them from a great and useful
indirect participation in the entire social movement, which could have
| never been conducted by them alone, even as to the essential scope of
opinions and manners which specially interest them. Every other
mode of conceiving their status and consequently their duties and
ours, will really be as contrary at the least to their own good as to uni
versal harmony. If from the attitude of woman’s protector, men enter
a situation of rivalry toward her, she will become, I believe, very un
happy through the necessary impossibility in which she will soon find
herself of sustaining such a competition, directly contrary to the con
ditions of her existence. I believe, therefore that those who sincerely
*
love her, who ardently desire the most complete evolution possible of
the faculties and functions properly belonging to her, must desire that
these anarchical utopias may never be tried?’
The third letter in this ensemble, and the last we shall give, is dated
Paris, November 14th, 1843. It is as follows: “Having now resumed
my daily occupations, I hasten to reply to your important letter of
October 30th before commencing my small work upon the ‘Ecole poly
technique,’ which, as it would take me a fortnight, would delay too
K long a response which I regard as the present termination of our great
biologico-sociological discussion. The general impression left upon
my mind by this letter, leads me, indeed, to think that this discussion
has now reached as far as it could with any utility be pushed; in
short, that there would at present be more inconvenience than advan
tage in further prolonging it, and it seems to me from your closing
words, that, at base, you are not far removed from the same opinion.
Without your divers arguments on this subject having in any way
shaken or even modified any of my previous convictions, they have
proved to me that the time has not yet come for seeing you arrive at
the fundamental truths upon this capital point which I have for a long
time received, but leave me, nevertheless, in all its fullness, the hope
that your further meditations may end by leading you also to the
same conclusion. In our present position we agree neither upon the
principles nor even the facts which must indispensably contribute
to the decision; and, consequently, it becomes proper not to finally
close the discussion, but to indefinitely suspend it, until such time as
on one side or the other the conditions of a useful resumption are found
effectively fulfilled. Still, I think I ought, for the last time, to take up
�176
THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
summarily the principal articles of your letter, in order the better to
characterize as I have not hitherto been able to do so, the essential
points of opposition, at once logical and scientific, thus established
between us in this respect.
“ In the beginning, I share essentially your logical opinion as to the
superior difficulty now offered by questions of social statics as compared
with dynamical questions. However, although the positive elaboration
of the latter is now much more mature, at the same time that it is
happily more urgent, I believe it possible to demonstrate immediately
the principal bases of static Sociology, and I expect to give an example
of it in the methodical treatise which I will commence at the end of
the present winter. I even think that without this preliminary condi
tion the dynamical theory would not have sufficient rationality. I can
now feel bold, as, for my own mind, this preamble has been accom
plished for many years, although I have not hitherto been able to
sufficiently develop this order of convictions so as to have them prop
erly shared by other thinkers. Owing to the fact that the fundamental
laws of existence can never be really suspended, it is very difficult to
clearly distinguish their continuous influence in the study of the
phenomena of activity; but this is not, however, impossible, as we can
do so by properly .estimating what is common to all the essential cases
offered by them. Besides, I believe that the preliminary light shed by
pure Biology, and which then has, especially in the present question, a
superior importance, is. now much more advanced than you seem ready
to admit, despite the little satisfactory state of our biological studies.
Doubtless, as you say, in reacting against the philosophical aberrations
of the last century, contemporary thinkers have been at times led to
exaggerate in the opposite direction. Thus Gall, in worthily upholding
the preponderant influence of the primordial organism, has too much
neglected that of education so abusively extolled by Helvetius. But,
though the truth is assuredly between the two, it is far, in my opinion,
from consisting in the exact balance {juste milien), and is found much
nearer the present opinion than the preceding. It was very natural to
at first estimate the external influences as plainer, and thi§ is what
the eighteenth century has everywhere done on all biological subjects
in which the notions of the medium are always shown before that of
the organism. But this is surely not the normal state of biological ’
philosophy, in which the organic conditions must certainly prevail;
since it is the organism and not the medium that makes us men rather
than monkeys or dogs, and which even determines our special mode
of humanity to a degree much more circumscribed than is commonly
believed. Under the logical aspect, by applying the natural march
that your valuable treatise has so judiciously characterized as the
Method of Residues, we cannot, it seems to me, especially in such
*
* See “ Mill’s Logic,” Vol. Ill, chap. viii. 3d London Ed. (1851) Vol. I, pp. 404, 405.
�THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
177
complex subjects, regard as indifferent the order of partial subtractions
which ought always to be followed out as far as possible according to
the decreasing importance that a primary general estimation sponta
neously awards to the diverse determinable influences; in short, that in
biological researches we ought most frequently to reverse the order which
you believe always preferable, viz., from the external to the internal.
u I regret exceedingly that the grave defects of co-ordination inherent
in Gall’s work should have so shocked a mind as methodical as yours, thus
hindering you hitherto from appreciating the fundamental reality of
his essential demonstrations, abstraction made of all irrational or prema
ture localization. You may, perhaps, in this respect be less dissatisfied
with his great early work, (Analogicpt physiologie du systeme nerveux
en general et du cerveau en particulier, in 4to,) although it is probably
too anatomical for your purpose. But the same fundamental ideas
are presented in better logical form in the more systematic works of
Spurzheim, that is to say, Observations sur la phrenologie, Essai philosophique sur les facultes morales et intellectuelles, the work upon
Education, and even that relating to insanity, which constitute in all
only four thin octavo volumes, easily read in one or two weeks.
Without the subordination of . sexes being directly examined there,
we can, however, regard this doctrine as having already sufficiently
established, as far, at least, as Biology can do so, the fundamental
principle of the domestic hierarchy. Before philosophical Biology
had properly arisen under Vicq. d’Azyr and Bichat, and altogether
independently of cerebral physiology, an estimable work, though not
very eminent, still deserving to be read, had already attempted to
found this principle upon the single preponderant consideration of
physical destination; it is a small treatise of a Montpellier physician,
(Roussel), entitled Systemephysique et morale de la femme, published in
1775, under the scientific impulsion of the labors of Borden, the great
precursor of Bichat. Comparative Biology seems to me, further, to
leave no real doubt on this subject. In following, for instance, M. de
Blainville’s lectures, though he had in yiew no thesis whatsoever on
this question, one cannot fail, to perceive arise from the ensemble of
the studies on animals, the general law of the superiority of the mas
culine sex in all the higher part of the living hierarchy; we will have
to descend among the invertebrates in order to find, and still very
rarely, notable exceptions to this great organic rule, which presents
besides the diversity of the sexes as increasing with the degree of
organization. I am, therefore, far from agreeing to abandon biological
considerations, although I regard the sociological appreciation as being
able without other aid to directly establish this important hotion; but
biological inspirations must then serve to properly direct sociological
speculations, which, in this respect, as in all other elementary ones,
seem to me ought to offer only a sort of philosophical prolongation of
-the great biological theorems.
23
�178
THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
“ As to the sociological appreciation separately regarded, I cannot
agree with you that the English medium is more favorable to the
mental and moral development of women than the French. Ab
straction made of all national vanity, of which you know me certainly
to be very independent, I believe, on the contrary, that the ladies of
France should be more developed from this very cause, that they live
in, more oomplete society with men. This diversity between us is
otherwise only a consequence of another more general, consisting in
the fact that the social constitution appears to you to have been
hitherto unfavorable to feminine development, while it seems to me
very proper for cultivating the qualities proper for women. As to the
rest, I am nowise competent to contest your observation upon English
households. But I believe that in it you confound too much simple
domestic administration with the true general government of the
family. In all Occidental Europe, I believe that, as in England,
households are administered by the women; but everywhere also,
save individual anomalies, it is the men who govern the common
affairs of the family. .
“1 cannot at all accept your comparison of the condition of women
to that of any sort of slaves. I have indicated this analogy only to
prevent a natural enough objection, tending to indirectly invalidate my
conclusion upon the passage from fact to principle. But, on a direct
comparison of the two cases, it seems to me that, since the establish
ment of monogamy, and especially in modern sociability, the term ‘ser
vitude’ is extremely vicious when meant to characterize the social
state of our gentle partners, and consequently I can nowise accept the
historical parallelism upon the simultaneous variations of two situations
so radically heterogeneous. Sale and non-possession are the principal
characters of all slavery—they have certainly never been applicable to
the occidentals of the last five centuries.
*
“ As to the progress which, for a century, is gradually working for
feminine emancipation, I do not at all believe in it, either as a fact or
as a principle. Our female authors seem to me no way superior, in
reality, to Mme. de Sevigne, Mme. de la Fayette, ,Mme. de Motteville,
and other remarkable ladies of the seventeenth century. I cannot
decide, whether it is otherwise in England. The woman who, under
a man’s name, (George Sand,) has now become so celebrated among us,
appears to me, at base, very inferior, not only in propriety, but even in
feminine originality, to the greater number of these estimable types.
* See remarks above, p. 174, and also “The Subjection of Women,” 2d London
Ed., pp. 8, 9,18, ff., and 28. Mr. Mill here traces pathetically, nay, almost tragically,
the parallelistn mentioned by M. Comte. One thought suggested itself while
reading it: Why slave-masters who were apparently as much interested as hus
bands in having their slaves docile, etc., did not try the same means to accomplish
this end as Mr. Mill asserts husbands to have done? Should his genesis of the
present condition of women prove true, of which certain damaging omissions
make us afraid, we would recommend it to Mr. Darwin as the most long-continued
and successful piece of artificial “ selection ” to be anywhere found.—Tr.
�THE
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
179
I do not see, in reality, any other notable increase than that of the
number and material fecundity of these authoresses, as Moli&re prob
ably foresaw; but I am doubtful whether any true progress is shown in
it. This movement consists chiefly in a growing intemperance, which
appears to me a sad but very natural consequence (or rather face) of
our universal mental anarchy since the inevitable decay of the frail
bases that theology had provisionally supplied to the entirety of great
moral and social notions. Beside this part of the negative disturbance
having been found especially favored by energetic passions, it has had
only to contend against perhaps the weakest part of theological socia
bility; for what can. be more illusory than to found the, domestic
hierarchy upon Adam’s supernumerary rib ? Is it astonishing, that
principles so lightly constituted, have not been able to resist the shock
of impassioned anarchy? But their momentary discredit really proves
no more than the necessity for better establishing them. Under this
relation the deplorable discussions thus raised, although yet essentially
deprived of logical reasonableness, besides being unhappily inevitable,
are at least useful, in obliging us to more profoundly fathom the in
timate motives of this indispensable domestic co-ordination. The
present emeuts of women, or rather of some womejn, will in the end
have no other result than that of presenting experimentally the insur
mountable reality of the fundamental principle of such subordination,
which must then. react profoundly upon all the other parts of social
economy; but this useful conclusion will be found purchased at the
price of much public and private misery, which a more philosophical
advance would have shunned were such rationality now possible. If
this disastrous social equality of the two sexes were ever really at
tempted, it would immediately radically disturb the conditions of
existence of the sex that some desire thus to favor, and with regard to
which the present protection, that must alone be completed by regu
lating it, would then be converted into a competition impossible to
habitually sustain. Such an assimilation will otherwise tend morally
to destroy the principal charm which now draws us towards women,
and which resulting from a sufficient harmony between social diversity
and organic diversity, supposes women to be in an essentially passive
and speculative situation that can in no way hinder their just partici
pation in all great social sympathies. If such a principle of repulsion
could be pushed to its extreme natural limit, I venture to affirm that it
will appear directly opposed to the reproduction of our species, which
restores, in this respect, the biological point of view, more intimately
connected there than elsewhere with the sociological.
“ All this may perhaps appear to you very extended for a discussion
which I regarded as provisionally terminated ; but for this very reason
I undertook to better characterize our principal dissidences. For the
rest, although without present result, I am far from regretting that you
have begun it, for it will assist me considerably in properly feeling the
�180
THE
’
SUBJECTION
OF
WOMEN.
A
essential points to be especially insisted upon in my forthcoming
treatise, in my attempt at a static demonstration of a principle which,
despite its eminently elementary nature, is yet so profoundly misunder
stood by so superior and so well-prepared a mind. Permit me, how
ever, to hope, according to my own previous experience, that this
situation of your judgment constitutes really only a last transient
phase of the great negative transition belonging to our age.”*
° Mr. Mill has forcibly called attention (work cited, p. 99) to a fact which
deserves Careful study. After acknowledging that no woman had been a Homer,
an Aristotle, or a Michael Angelo, he remarks: “ It is a curious consideration, that
the only things which the existing law excludes women from doing, are the things
^fliich they have proved they are able to do. * * * Their vocation for govern
ment has made its way and become conspicuous through the very few opportunities
which have been given, while in the lines of distinction, which apparently were
freely open to them, they have by no means so eminently distinguished them
selves.” From the way Mr. Mill puts it, the distinction seems well founded, and
on further reflection, seems one of the most “ curious ” things in the world. That
exercise and freedom should in woman’s case act the very reverse of what they do
among men, seems to go far to substantiate M. Comte’s doctrine of fundamental
difference between the sexes. While it seems in the nature of a standing “ miracle”
to know how a state could have originated or how it could be kept up that inter
dicts beings from their real natural vocation. If I understand the English philoso
pher correctly, it might be wholesome for women to have an edict on our statute
books against writing poetry or painting; if it could act as political proscription
seemingly does, all should hope for the early arrival of the day.—Tr.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The subjection of women
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Comte, Auguste
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: New York
Collation: [169]-180 p. ; 26 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From Modern Thinker, no. 1, 1870. "Discussion with Mr J.S. Mill on the social condition of women". Based on correspondence between Comte and Mill that began at the end of 1841. Includes bibliographical references. Printed on blue paper.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[American News Company]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5422
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br />This work (The subjection of women), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Conway Tracts
John Stuart Mill
Marriage
Women
Women-Social Conditions
Women's Emancipation
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/00af03e2d6a18c53a98277a9f1260196.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=YbxmgVDX3z7DeK3J6jdOw33ooObQVLRGocH1yyjavqYAnzARcrwrxwqmHdEykm6yZuy9uE%7EYn1ZmrhfH4X%7Ebp2Of-3XgaRSzUXwKKV2eIscqcyt%7EZuXQkcvAHB9TaHYf5zB4ZNY-d3jahaS3RG1SxyFCeDSXs0rIH6lhUHyGUteBZTHTagXwxKsnHGJPLevdB2aAs5TTBfyLcaE-no3f6YhAglorVTlGEeTgbdXiks%7E0Gv7SpT-4n9qf7K8454G7KXoh-DCP%7E3o9g48E1rLJ9o8Gz0OW%7E3v2JloMZhV%7Ejm5EKDK6om2dbQVX5m5ZUcpqn7mH8%7EBlU-sEWFwMK861Bg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
847e3df87cada77830fe9fd47c8c0d53
PDF Text
Text
FRIEND OF PROGRESS.
Vol. 1.]
New York, July, 1865.
Frances Power Gobbe.
BY T. W. HIGGINSON.
[No. 9.
and one often observes it while traveling, in
the hands of young gentlemen of serious
aspect, and young ladies of no particular
aspect at all. It sometimes suggests curiosity
as to the precise shape in which these scat
tered rays are transmitted through these vari
ous private prisms.
The new volume on “Religious Duty”*
appears to be an earlier work than ‘ ‘ Broken
Lights,” and in some respects more extended.
Her subject she defines as “comprehending
the actions and sentiments due by man imme
diately to his Maker.” She treats of Reli
gious Offenses, which comprise Blasphemy,
Apostacy, Hypocrisy, Perjury, Sacrilege, Per
secution, Atheism, Pantheism, Polytheism,
Idolatry, and Demonolatry. Then of Religious
Faults, including Thanklessness, Irreverence,
Prayerlessness, Impenitence, Skepticism, and
Worldliness. Then of Religious Obligations,
classed as Thankgiving, Adoration, Prayer,
Repentance, Faith, and Self-consecration.
The mere list of these subdivisions implies a
good deal of thoroughness, and, perhaps, a lit
tle over-minuteness of systematization.
There is no want of courage in the book,
and the writer adheres most faithfully to her
position of “Absolute Religion.” On the
appearance of a new edition of Longfellow’s
and Johnson’s “Book of Hymns,” now called
“Hymns of the Spirit,” an enthusiastic admi
rer wrote: “The book is theologically pure.
The name of Christ does not appear in it;”
meaning that the hymns recognized Jesus only
in a human character, and by a human appel
lation. Tried by this rather novel test of
If Miss Cobbe had the good fortune to write
in an attractive style, she would achieve for
herself a leading position in the most ad
vanced Beligious literature. No one else
shows so strong a desire to develop Theism
into a system, without reference to Jewish and
Christian traditions, and to fit it out with the
requisite ethical adaptations. She is also
very sincere and single-minded, free from
cant and rant, and shows much reading in
the most desirable directions. But her style
is apt to be bare and tame, without having the
sort of crisp dry clearness which sometimes
lends attraction to theological books else un
readable; as is the case, for instance, with
Beecher’s “Conflict of Ages,” and Norton’s
‘ ‘ Genuineness of the Gospels. ” Hers is rather
the style of average Unitarian discourses; a
style unexceptionable, but without freshness,
saliency, or relief, and hence rather unat
tractive.
She has been heretofore known in this coun
try as the author of “ Intuitive Morals,” and
the English editor of Theodore Parker’s works.
This is good ground for reputation. The first
part of her first book was certainly remarka
ble, though the second part by no means
equaled it; and her edition of Theodore Par
ker puts his American literary executors to
shame. But she is rapidly becoming still
better known through her own contributions
to theology. “Broken Lights” has already
been frankly criticised in these pages. It is
*“ Religious Duty, by Frances Power Cobbe.’>
apparently obtaining quite a wide circulation, Boston: 5V. V. Spencer. 12mo. pp. viii, 326. $1.75.
Entered according to Act of Congress by C. M. Plumb & Co., in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the
United States, for the Southern District of New York.
�258
The inend of Progress.
orthodox}', Miss Cobbe’s last work is theologi out of the true church invisible those wbo<
cally pure also. It is not professedly a trea found themselves in this position.—In aU
tise on Christian Duty, but on Religious Duty. these respects the canons laid down by Miss
And though the writer suggests a latent con Cobbe are a step downward from his position,
fusion in her title by admitting that all duty is and are directly in the spirit of sectarianism.
religious; still this objection would not have
This can be readily shown by quoting her
been averted, and many others would have own language; the italics not being, however,
been introduced, by using the word “Chris her own.
tian.” That is a word which no disciple of
“Nevertheless, the unspeakable blessing
Miss Cobbe’s can use without embarrassment, and honor of communion offered to us by
because, by the whole theory of Theism, the God in prayer renders our rejection of them a
world is destined to outgrow all personal religious fault, tantamount to a general delin
quency in all religious duty. He who cares
names. If by “Christian” one means to des not to obtain the aid of God’s grace, or feel
ignate simply what is pure, right, noble, man the joy of His presence, is manifestly in a
ly,—then these last are the clearer and better condition wherein the religious part of his
words. If it means anything more or less nature must be dormant. Such sentiments
as remain to him can scarcely possess eth
than these, it is not desirable at all. Chris ical merit, inasmuch as they must be
tian virtue is simply virtue, Christian morals merely the residue of those natural instincts,
simply morals. Why complicate the phrases which, if duly cherished, must have led him to
by the addition of an adjective, which only prayer. The occasional God-ward impulses
which show themselves in all men, so far from
confuses their meaning, because it must itself constituting the fulfillment of this obligation,
be interpreted,—and however interpreted, is no form the very ground of their guilt when left
barren. Without such religious sentiments,
improvement on the simpler word ?
man could have no religious duty at all.
It is saying much for Miss Cobbe, to say that Possessed of them, he is bound to cultivate
she has kept resolutely clear of all this. In and display them in all the forms of direct
this respect her position is more unequivocal and indirect worship. ” (p. 94.)
than that of Theodore Parker, who clung to the
She afterwards, in a vague way, limits these
word “Christian”—as, indeed, he was rath remarks to those who believe that “prayer for
er attached to the word “ Unitarian.”
spiritual good receives a real answer from
When it came to a definition of Absolute God.” “It is possible for religious minds at
Religion, however, his was certainly the more an early stage to make mistakes for a time
comprehensive. His definition was simply, on this matter,” &c. (p. 95.) But the fact
“Faith in God, and love to man.” Hers seems never to have dawned upon her mind,
appears to be: “ Good morals, plus the habit that there are multitudes of earnest persons
of conscious personal prayer.”
in all stages of culture, and of all grades of
It is at this point that she and her immediate moral excellence, to whom conscious praye r
teacher diverge; not at belief in prayer, but has been for years a rare and occasional im
at its recognition as the ground of spiritual de pulse only, and perhaps not even that;—to
marcation and classification. Theodore Parker whom, at any rate, it is no part of their regu
believed in prayer intensely, and loved it lar plan of life.
intensely. He would have liked every public
Can any observing person doubt that the
lecture to be preceded or followed by it. His external practices of prayer are rapidly di
volume of prayers is, on the whole, the most minishing in our community, like all other
characteristic work he has left behind, and may external religious forms,—like baptism, and
live the longest. While reproached—even by the communion service, and church-member
men so liberal as Beecher,—with a deficiency ship ? It is impossible to deny that this tend
of religious sentiment, he was yet the only ency often coexists with increased moral
minister to whom it had occurred to address earnestness, and with higher and higher ideas
the Deity as both Father and Mother. Yet, of the Universe. It is not now needful to
for all this, he never once suggested that maintain or defend this position; only to
conscious personal prayer was essential to state it. But Miss Cobbe finds nothing to do
the highest spiritual attitude. He recognized with any such tendency, except to exclude it
with charity the scruples which prevented from her imaginary synagogue.
some, and the instinctive disinclination which
Yet after all, it is to be noticed, that,
withheld others, from taking part in it. He when this author comes to her highest state
never proposed, directly or indirectly, to read ment of possible prayer, she comes round to.
�Frances Power Coble.
an assertion which many of these excluded
ones might claim to make for themselves.
“I shall speak of that indirect worship
wherein it is to be hoped all life at last may
merge for us—wherein not only we shall
know that ‘laborare est orare,'1 but all feel
ing shall be holy feeling, all thought shall be
pure, loving, resigned, adoring thought; so
that at every moment of existence we shall
1 gloriiy God in our bodies, and in our spirits,
which are God’s.’” Then she quotes the fa
mous passage from Coleridge, which has been
the comfort of so many:
“ Ere on my bed my limbs I lay
It hath not been my use to pray
With moving lips or bended knees ;
But silently, by slow degrees,
My . pirit I to love compose,
In. humble trust mine eyelids close,
With reverential resignation;
No wish conceived, no thought expressed.
Only a. sense of supplication—
A sense o’er all my soul impressed,
That I am weak, yet not unblest,
Since in me, round me, everywhere,
Eternal strength and wisdom are.”
Yet will Miss Cobbe venture to say, that
those whose conceptions of Deity are so inef
fable and sublime, and their recognition of
his laws so complete, that specific or uttered
prayer seems to them an impertinence, may
not be as far advanced toward this higher
state as herself, or as any representative of
that type of moral progress which she de
scribes ?
Theodore Parker, her especial teacher,
never seemed so noble, because never so
humble, as when he acknowledged his own
obligations, and admitted his own inferiority,
to his especial teacher, Emerson. Yet how
far is Emerson, who can calmly speak of the
progress of humanity as tending to ‘ ‘ sweep
out of men’s minds all vestige of theisms”—
how far is he from Miss Cobbe’s type of reli
gion, or even of morality;—how near to her
type of “guilt!”
Something of the same narrowness is shown
in her, hearty denunciations of that “cold
pseudo philosophy ” which substitutes for the
endearing word “God,” the more distant
phrases of “the Deity,” “the Supreme Be
ing,” “the Almighty.” She seems utterly
unable to conceive of that mood of intense
reverence, when one instinctively seeks the
loftiest words, though they be the remotest,
and where any word at all seems almost a
profanation. Saadi says, ’ ‘ Who knows God,
is silent.” When, in that grand passage of
Faust, the philosopher utterly refuses to give
259
a name to the Unknown— Name 1st Schall
und Rauch, umnebelndHimmelsglutli)—even
the innocent little Margaret answers that it is
all very fine and good, and that the priest says
nearly the same, only with words a little dif
ferent; but to Miss Cobbe it seems all very
improper. Although she elsewhere admits
that Pantheism and Anthropomorphism are
only the two opposing tendencies of that
ever-swinging pendulum, the human soul,
yet she seems unconscious how closely her
own temperament holds her to the latter side.
She has never discovered that, in all ages,
man’s sublimest reveries are most Pantheistic,
while it is his daily needs and instincts that
bring him back to a personal God.
Apart from these limitations of tempera
ment, her discussion of the subject of Prayer
is interesting and valuable, whatever one may
think of her conclusions. More than a third
of the volume is given, under different titles,
to this theme. She even believes in prayer
for our departed friends, and enters on a long
argument to show its propriety. (Pp. 200-5.)
She demands more family prayers, and more
stated private prayers. “ Suppose that in
stead of confining our grace to one meal in
the day, we were each to say, in our own
hearts, a little grace after every successive
occupation.” (p. 134.)
Though she here says, “in our liearts,”
she yet implies something more explicit, in
this multiplication of observances. She insists
upon the form, and does not shrink from put
ting her demand in the most matter-oi-fact
way. For she says, on the same page: “ We
should show gratitude by actually expressing
our thanks in the words which would sponta
neously issue from our lips were our hearts
truly kindled." Yet this seems very incon
sistent with the position taken by her in re
gard to attendance on public worship. “As
for the attendance at worship, &c., ‘for ex
ample’s sake,’ it is marvelous how any hu
man creatures have ever had the presumption
to entertain such an idea. Let any sane man
consider what he does when he enters a
church, and ask himself how his “exemplary”
behavior therein must appear to God, and I
cannot but suppose he will be sufficiently
shocked to abandon such attempts for the
future. For either he must intend really to
worship, to thank, adore and pray to the great
Lord of all, or he must intend to make an
outward show of so doing without any uplift
ing of soul. The latter conduct is grossly in-
�260
The Friend of Progress.
suiting to the God who watches him,” &c. &c.
When she comes to points involving sim(pp. 33-4.)
ply moral courage, however, how fine and
But if the author herself advises her readers discriminating are her statements! The fol
to show gratitude by formally employing lowing, for instance, is admirable, and much
words which ought to come spontaneously, needed just at present.
but do not, —it is certainly a venial step farther
“Few of us have not much to repent in the
to employ the same words, for the benefit way of unworthy silences on our true faith;
of others, under similar circumstances. The silences, which, if caused by tenderness, were
truth is, that great danger waits, for most weak,—if by any fear, cowardly and base.
Vast numbers of free-thinkers, especially, and
temperaments, upon any merely ritual observ above all the elder Deists, seem actually to
ance. Jean Paul goes so far as to declare, have accepted their antagonists’ view of their
in his Levana, that “a grace before meat own creed, and to consider that the next best
thing to not knowing a truth was the not
must make every child deceitful.”
spreading it. Others, like Sterling, say that
This may be too strongly stated; and the as they are not professional teachers of Reli
whole theme requires the greatest delicacy of gion, they may teach (even their own
treatment, not so much for the sake of public children!) the opposite errors! It is marvel
ous that men do not see the turpitude, reli
opinion, as for the sake of truth and the affec gious, personal and social, involved in such
tions. But I am firm in the belief that the conduct. For ourselves, a life in which the
t endency of the age is to the disuse of all family inward and the outward are in harmony is
devotions, and that this disuse proceeds from absolutely needful to all moral health and
progress; and that the stunted religious
the correct conviction, that such observances growth of many free-thinkers may be attrib
very soon become formal and unprofitable, to utable to this inward rottenness, no one who
knows his own nature can doubt.” (pp. 28-9.)
nine persons out of ten.
These various defects are pointed out, be
As frankly and clearly does she deal with a
cause they constitute the only drawbacks form of hypocrisy seldom noticed, and so
upon a strong and noble book;—a book which abundant that it penetrates almost all public
will be read with deep interest by all who agree religious services—the hypocrisy of represent
with the author’s general attitude. No one ing ourselves as worse than we really are.
has given abler and clearer statements of the ‘ ‘ If we desire to grow better than we are, we
sufficiency of Natural Religion, or stated must, in the first place, be openly what we
more forcibly its independence of all tra are. We must live out our own life of duty
dition or historic narrative. She believes faithfully, uprightly, humbly, never trying to
in it too thoroughly to need the aid of any conceal our faults and making no prudery
buttresses so unsubstantial. He whose most about such poor withered charms as our vir
vital opinions have for their corner-stone a Mir tues ever possess. The life of virtue is before all
aculous Conception or a Resurrection, holds things a life of simplicity. The man who pro
his faith and hope at the mercy of the latest fesses selfish, worldly motives, when he is con
critic or translator. He who rests his convic scious of better ones, who jests about lax and
tions on eternal principles can let the waves vicious habits when his own are pure, runs
of criticism ebb and flow, he remaining un most imminent risk of very shortly adoptingtouched. Not bound to the petty details of those motives in earnest, and falling actually
any single form of creed or worship, he is in into those evil habits.” (p. 35.)
sympathy with the pure and noble of all ages.
In using one disparaging phrase above,
It is thus that the writer of Religious Duty is she perhaps crosses the border of the very
strong; and she is only weak where she shrinks offense she censures, of undue self-disparage
from the consequences of her own principles, ment. But it is an offense she seldom
and thinks it necessary to disavow the fellow commits; she is a strong, sincere, and noble
ship of those who only vary from her in tem woman; she is free from almost all the em
perament or training,—not in sincerity, nor barrassments of the sects; and every one whoeven in the essential points of belief. There is aiming at such freedom should read every
is certainly a distinguishable difference be word she writes.
tween the spiritual attitude of Parker and
Emerson: but after all there is something
—He that giveth love receiveth love, which
rather strange in the position of a woman who is his return and reward for giving. He must
edits the one writer, and utterly repudiates the ever receive more than he giveth, for his ca
other
I pability progresses.
�Womanhood.
OB,
Madelon’s
Soliloquy.
BY LIZZIE DOTEN.
0 wondrous gift of womanhood ! how frail,
And yet how strong ! How simple, yet how wise!
How full of subtle mysteries thou art!
The heights of glory and the depths of shame,
Transcendent bliss and agonies of pain,
Beauty and terror, Life and Death through love,
Are all combined and manifest in thee.
Through thy divinest gift of motherhood,
Immortal souls are debtors unto thee;
For all the elements of mortal mold,
By which the soul becomes incorporate,
And finds admission to this natural world,
Take form and shape, through subtlest chem
istry
And brooding life, in thee.
Lo, here I stand,
A woman! Would to God that I could know
The scope and meaning of that potent word,
With its divine intent; that I might say
To men and manners, habits, customs, laws—
Stand back ! I am a woman! and I claim
Freedom from everything that doth impose
Restraint upon my proper womanhood.
I do appeal from comm n usage: dare
The venom and vitupei us speech of tongues
That only know to slan! er. I conform
No longer to the false ilea which makes
Me but the adjunct of man’s social life—
His puppet, plaything, servile tool, or worse
Than these—the slave of his base pleasure.
The bonds I rive—the silken, tinsel gyves,
Which Fashion round her votaries weaves.
I walk
With fearless freedom in my quest for truth,
And quips of caitiffs—scorn of meddling shrews,
Or prudent warnings from the worldly wise,
Shall not restrain me from my high intent.
Manis not woman—woman is not man;
Yet is.it for his weal and mine, that I,
And all who bear the sacred name of woman,
Should strive to reach that social altitude,
Where, with the difference of our gifts con
fessed,
We stand as equals, side by side with man.
Why do I stay to question ? even now
The die is cast. Already on my heart
The world’s harsh judgment, like a vulture sits,
With beak and talons dripping blood. The
Truth
Leaps up like fire to my unwilling lips.
Impelled by mine own sacred womanhood,
I speak what timorous souls refuse to hear.
Already have I met the social ban—
Have dared to think, and speak as I have
thought;
Have shocked false delicacy—wounded pride—
Called things by their right names, and much
disturbed
Those souls who have the world’s morality
In charge, and whose extravagant pretense
To virtue is their greatest vice.
261
Alas!
God pity me ! for every word I speak,
Though sanctioned by eternal Truth, is born
Of untold anguish in my woman’s heart.
And well I know that each unwelcome truth
That issues from my lips, serves as a cloud,
To shut love’s sunshine from my shivering
heart.
A woman, walking unaccustomed ways,
And using most unusual forms of speech,
And seeing what the world would least have
seen,
And telling what the wo id would least have
known,
Performs a thankless service, and doth gain
But little vantage. By the common rule,
A woman should have pulp instead of brains—
Should have no thew or sinew to her thought,
Or weight and meaning in her speech, lest she
Offend the sensibilities of love.
Yet have I not the freedom of a choice;
The Fates, which consummate Eternal Will,
Constrain me. I am made a sacrifice
To powers unseen, like sad Polyxena,
Who fell a victim to Achilles’ ghost;
Or like Cassandra—favored of the gods,
Though filled with the celestial fire, I breathe
My prophecies to unbelieving ears.
Men say I have a devil! Pious men !
Who measure others’ morals by their own;
And saying thus, they stop their jealous ears,
Like those, who, with Ulysses, thus escaped
The soft enchantments of the syren isle.
Oh strange infirmity of faith ! Hath Truth,
Then, lost the pith and marrow of its life,
That I, a feeble woman, can prevail
In aught against it ? If so, let it fall!
For it is dead. The living Truth must stand.
God help me ! I must speak ! not for myself,
But for the sorrowing sisterhood of woman—
The doves by vultures torn—the bleeding
lambs—
The timorous deer pursued by cruel hounds;
And with all these, a painted, reckless throng,
Full of rude jests and wanton flouts and flings,
Tricked out in flaunting silks and tinsel gauds,
From whom the high estate and potent charm
Of womanhood hath long since lapsed away.
Yet, as a woman, I am bound to such,
And they, in turn, have part and lot in me.
Oh fallen sisterhood! your woes and wrongs
Knock with a piteous pleading at my heart,
And in the sacred name of womanhood,
The hand of sympathy I will extend,
And greet each as a sister and a friend.
Woman weak ! in virtue frail!
On whose cheek the rose is pale,
From whose eye the light hath fled,
In whose heart all hope is dead—
What have I to boast o’er thee ?
Come ! and find a friend in me.
While we share the name of woman,
We have sympathies in common.
Do you shrink and turn away—
Warning me what man will say ?
I have known the world too long,
Not to hold my purpose strong;
�262
The Triend of Progress.
Pious knave and dainty dame,
Loud may cry, “ For sliarne ! for shame!”
But I’ve learned that great professions,
Often hide most foul transgressions.
All my nerves, like tempered steel,
Life’s magnetic changes feel;
All the streams of human woe
Through myVbeing’s channels flow;
Every sorrow, every smart,
Is repeated in my heart;
Therefore, let us walk together—
Friends in fair and foulest weather.
Though a woman, yet will I
Scorn, and shame, and wrong defy;
I will dare the world’s disgrace,
Till I find my proper place,
And will lend a hand to all
Who may by the wayside fall.
Souls that act with brave decision
Need not fear the world’s derision.
/
Be I lioness or lamb,
God hath made me what I am.
Whatsoe’er my gift may be,
It is all in all to me;
And in doing what I cun,
I shall serve both God and man.
Therefore, with my best endeavor,
I shall struggle upward ever.
“Woman and her Era”
versus
“A PLEA FOR THE MASCULINE.”
BY J. V. V. R.
The first article of the second number of the
Friend of Progress, “A Plea for the Mascu
line”—so courteous in its tone, so candid in
its statement of principles, and so logical in
its method—would doubtless have been an
swered.by the author of “Woman and her
Era,” had she been spared to the world and
restored to health. As it is, a thorough
believer in the doctrine of the superiority of
woman may be excused for taking her place
here, though it would be impossible even in
this to fill the hiatus left by her untimely
departure.
It is fortunate for the present discussion
that the parties are agreed, or nearly so, as
to the premises. The “Plea” not only ac
knowledges, but takes as the basis of its
‘ ‘ argument demonstrating the equality of the
sexes,’’the positions from which Mrs. Farnham
deduces the inequality of the sexes, and the
superior excellence on woman’s side. Its
grand truth, the general of all its particulars,
on which it hangs its entire argument, is,
“that Quantity is masculine—Quality femi
nine.” Now, it is an instinctive feeling, and
a first thought of the unsophisticated mind,
that quality, other things being equal, is the
standard of value, and that quantity, in itself,
is of no value whatever, but positive trash and
incumbrance. According to this, the more
there is of a mere man the worse it is for
him, as in the case of several famous scourges
of mankind who had the epithet “Great” at
tached to their names. But the more there is
of a pure woman, the better it is for her, be
cause she has the qualities of mind and heart
that make her valuable, a ‘ recious treasure
p
to her family and the world.
The question is, which excels, quality or
quantity? and the answer is, that quality is
synonymous with excellence, and that quan
tity in itself has no excellence at all. We
estimate the value of metals, stones, fruits,
animals, and human beings, by their quality,
the source of their qualifications for any
use whatever—and the lack of this makes
dross, dirt, trash, garbage, nuisance, all in
the degree of the quantity, growth, and accre
tion, which Mr. Dickerson states to be mascu
line. By “quality,” of course he means
“good quality,” fineness and exquisiteness of
organization, and purity and delicacy of soul,
and by “quantity,” of course he means a
“good deal,” which does not mean good at
all, but simply very much. Now, which is
superior, that to which we can attach a moral
attribute, some sort of merit, qualifications of
some sort, or that to which we can attach
none? Mr. Dickerson says that the two are
equal. He says, “ Woman is better than
man. She stands a mediator between him
and the positively pure, spiritual, lovely, of
the universe.” On the other side he says
merely, “Man is more than woman. He
stands a mediator between her and the abso
lutely grand, magnificent, sublime, of the
universe.” And yet he asserts the equality of
the sexes, as if better were not superior to
more—a diamond to a boulder, a strawberry
to a pumpkin, a man to an elephant, and a
woman to a man 1 The value of quantity
depends entirely on quality, but the value of
quality does not depend on quantity; it is
only increased by it. So the value of the
masculine depends entirely on the feminine;
but the value of the feminine does not depend
on the masculine—it is only increased by it.
Woman inspires man, is the motive of his
action, and man is subservient to woman, is
the instrument of her action.
�“ Woman and her Era ” versus “A Plea for the Masculine?
Quality is primarily spiritual, pertaining to
the soul, and to the essence, nature, or prin
ciple of things. Quantity is primarily a prop
erty of matter, of that which is formed of
particles and is capable of accretion and
growth. To maintain that quality is not su
perior to quantity, is to maintain that the
soul is not superior to the body, and that
God is not superior to the material universe.
Infinity, as we view it, is not an attribute of
quantity, either great or small, as Mr. D. sup
poses : it is an attribute of Quality, to which
no limitation can be assigned. Infinite Per
fection, Infinite Goodness, not infinite size or
quantity! The source, the Fountain of all
things, is the 1 ‘ center, ” not the ‘1 circumfer
ence:” it is with the “feminine,” not with the
“masculine,” which are respectively “cen
ter” and “circumference,” according to both
Mrs. F. and her critic. The center is superior
to the circumference, the cause is superior to
the effect, the angelic heaven is superior to
the stellar heaven, the soul is superior to the
body, the jewel is superior to the casket, the
internal is superior to the external, woman is
superior to man. All these exterior things
are for the sake of these interior things, and
their subserviency marks their inferiority, and
at the same time the honor bestowed upon
them.
Take the advocate of equality at his word,
that “woman is better than man,” and that
“man is more than woman
is not the
moral and spiritual nature, of which better is
predicable, superior to the carnal nature and
to knowledge, of which more is predicable?
Who does not place goodness above great
ness, “Aristides the Just’’above “Alexander
the Great ” ? Goodness includes all true great
ness, but greatness does not include all true
goodness. The cause includes the effect,
which is but its unfolding; the Divine is the
Being whose name is “Love,” “Life,”
“ Goodness,” all attributes of the feminine,
‘ ‘ in whom we live and move and have our
being.” The aspiration fortrue greatness, is
for goodness first, as its essential—its lan
guage is, “Great, not like Caasar, stained
with blood, but only great as I am good.”
The “widow’s mite" was “more" than all
the “rich men, of their abundance, threw
into the treasury ”—greater in the purity, the
genuineness of the charity, and greater in its
results. The sex that is better, is also greater,
in the sense of multum in parvo and of “that
life being long which answers life’s great
263
end,” than the sex whose characteristic is
quantity.
The writer of the “Plea for the Masculine,”
assigns “development” to woman, and
“growth” to man, defining development to
be “the unfolding of that which is,” and
growth to be “ the adding to that which is,”
and he says they are equal. Let us see.
Development, “the unfolding of that which
is,” is predicable of the Divine operation in
the work of creation, because the soul of all
things is a unit, and all things are the un
folding and manifestation of Itself'. Growth,
“addition to that which is,” is predicable of
matter, of material particles; but it is so only
in subserviency to development, to the action
of the unfolding life in the growth of the or
ganisms of plants and animals. Growth has
been the grand idea during man’s reign, ex
tending itself to education and the mind.
Woman’s era is ushered in with the idea of
Development, as the true method and sum of
education, and of everything natural and
artistic.
Development belongs to woman as a teacher
and a pupil, and it will produce in the world
a predominance of Quality over Quantity, of
the Feminine over the Masculine; and for
all that none the less, but all the more, of
quantity, though in numbers rather than in
bulk. It is often and well said of woman,
that “the most precious things are done up
in small packages,” and these are greater in
their developments than the largest growths.
There is one point in the argument for
“equality,” to which the view of its author
claims special attention, viz. : an asserted
necessity to the indissoluble marriage rela
tion. It says, “Prove the inequality of the
sexes, and you have proven the impossibility
of true eternal marriages.” Now, “even the
gods will not fight against necessity;” and if
“equality of the sexes” is absolutely indis
pensable to the conjugal—which itself is a
moral necessity beyond the ability of the free
will to resist—any attempt at a counter argu
ment might as well be resigned at once. But
there is an “if" in the case that “alters the
case”—that makes it questionable. The mas
culine has somehow got along in the marriage
relation, and in the happiest manner, accord
ing to its way of thinking, under the reign of
the idea of its own superiority. It has not
seen anything incompatible with a conjunc
tion performed by God and indissoluble by
man in the obligation of woman to “love,
�264
,
!
I
The Friend of Progress.
honor, and obey, and of man to merely hardly be said to equal his spiritual mother
“love and cherish.” Suppose the conjugal re- and the artist whose work he is.
lation should express itself in the instinct of
Here we might drop the argument, only
the woman to love, and of the man to love and that the article we have undertaken to an
honor? it is precisely what exists in the lover swer, pledges the author not to be con
relation before and during betrothal, and to vinced “until the following questions are
the extent of the period called the “honey settled in the negative: (1.) Is not the in
moon,” ere the theory of the opposite has finitude of Deity—his perfect amount—as
made the man tyrannical and the woman ser godlike as the unfathomableness of his nature
vile. And this lover-relation is the foretaste —his perfect state?” We have already seen
on earth of the “eternal marriage,” to which, that infinitude is not an attribute of quantity,
Mr. Dickerson asserts, the equality of the or of the measurable—it is rather an attribute
sexes is absolutely necessary. The language of the immeasurable, the “unfathomable,”
of the point in question is, “Prove the ine the character, the infinite perfection of Deity.
quality of the sexes, *
* and you have As to a “perfect state,” we can form some
shattered the very foundation upon which conception of it; but a “perfect amount,”
such [eternal] marriages can rest, viz.: mu what is it? Perfection pertains to quality—
tual conscioitsness of mutual worth. Mutual not to quantity. Both Infinity and Per
worth demands equal (not similar) attain fection, therefore, are archetypes of the femi
ments; therefore an equal grade of pro nine—not of the masculine.
gression.” By “mutual worth,” I suppose is
(2.) “Is not the aspiration toward this
meant mutual love, for it is the quality of the perfect magnitude as godlike as is the aspira
love that makes the worth of each to the tion toward the perfect state?” No ; better
other, and that is at the same time mutual. be good than great. “Be ye holy, for I am
But I do not see why there cannot be ‘ ‘ mu holy.” We aspire toward the “Divine liketual consciousness of mutual worth, ” in this ness”—not toward the Divine magnitude.
or in any other sense, without equal worth. This is an object of ambition, and makes men
The logical sequence does not appear. It tyrants, as the other makes them philanthro
seems to me a mere assumption to say that pists.
the worths must be equal in the conjugal rela
(3.) “Is not the acquisitiveness—the out
tion any more than in the relation between ward tendency and action of the masculine—
the Divine and the human, which is eternal as as noble, as truly in harmony with the Divine
well as that, and conjugal as well as that. design, as is the spiritualization—the inward
“Christ and his Bride” are the incarnate Di tendency, the concentrated action of the
vine Wisdom and Love. “ Heaven on earth” feminine?” “Acquisitiveness” as noble as
is Earth and Heaven united in wedlock. The “spiritualizationI” does any one need be told
parental and filial relation, too, is eternal, that it is not? It is “as truly in harmony7
and it is not that of equals. The relation of with the Divine design,” and so an oyster is
the Divine to the human is both parental and as truly in harmony with the Divine design
conjugal, and that of woman to man is so. as a man; but that does not make them
Woman’s pure love regenerates man’s sensual equal.
love—makes it pure, by making it subservient
(4. “ Is comprehension—the power to em
to her own. In comparing the sexes, Mrs. F. brace and contain—of less importance than
has compared the natural woman with the insight, the power to pierce and penetrate?”
natural man—not with the regenerate man. The embraced and contained is the precious
The failure to recognize this has caused the treasure; the pierced and penetrated is the
Atlantic Monthly to say that Mrs. F.’s men, mere receptacle, the husk, the shell, the out
with whom she compares her ideal woman, are side of things. Give me “ insight ” into the
all “scoundrels,” and it has led the author of penetralia of Nature, entrance to the interior
the “Plea for the Masculine ” to say that Mrs. of her temple, rather than comprehension of
F.’s book exposes masculine perversions, the outside, if I am to have but one. The
and well nigh ignores masculine excellence.” “holy of holies” is of more “importance,” of
The natural man, against the natural wo- diviner import and significance, than the
■ man, she has “weighed in the balance, and “outer court ” and the “profane place.”
found wanting.” And the regenerate man,
(5.) “ Does not the far-reaching, abundant
influenced, inspired, purified by her, can affection of the masculine, balance the con
�^Monopoly in Religion.
centrated devotedness of the feminine ?” For
example, the diluted, diffused, wAe-spread,
thin, shallow, superficial, surface love that is
natural to man—“wandering like the fool’s
eyes to the end of the earth, ” and tending ever
to licentiousness and adulteration—compared
with the concentrated, faithful, devoted, pure
love that is natural to woman ? No, it does
not balance. We value love according to its
quality, its purity, its genuineness, its refine
ment, its tenderness, its devotion, its unself
ishness, its spirituality, its blessedness: not
according to its quantity, which, if that is the
object, is increased by dilution and adultera
tion. The difference between woman’s and
man’s love is as the difference between the
choice and genuine article that is offered as a
free gift and token of affection, and the spuri
ous article, the shoddy, that is manufactured
by the wholesale for money.
(6.) “ Has the masculine aspiration to be
come and do more, a lesser claim upon our
reverence than has the aspiration of the femi
nine to become and do better ?” The good
are the revered—not the great. The “better”
the more revered, and the “ more ” the more
despised, if the person be not good. I would
rather be called “the best, littlest,” than
“the greatest, meanest of mankind.”
(7.) “And finally, is not the Divine Pres
ence of the Infinite as perfectly expressed in
the grand, stately, majestic appearance of the
true man, as is the Divine Presence of the
All-Pure expressed in the lovely, exquisite,
symmetrical appearance of the true woman?”
Well, suppose it were—which is the highest
attribute of the Divine—Purity or Infinity?
Holiness or Omnipresence ? But the only in
finity belonging to extension is that of infinite
space, which is nothing. The Infinity of
Deity is that implied in Infinite Perfec
tion, the object of love rather than of won
der. The difference between the objects of
love and wonder is precisely the difference
between the modest loveliness of woman and
the proud stateliness of man. Our exaltation
of woman to her true position does not de
grade, but elevates ourselves.
“He that
exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that
humbleth himself shall be exalted.” This
places the “true man” in a higher posi
tion, and the “true woman” in the highest.
265
Monopoly in Religion.
BY O. B. FROTHINGHAM.
John, the disciple, said one day: “Master,
we saw one casting out devils in thy name,
and we forbade him, because he followed not
with us.” Jesus replied: “Forbid him not;
for he that is not against us is for us.”
Wnat sort of man this was who was casting
out devils in the charmed name of Jesus, we
can only guess. He was probably some Jew
who thought that name a good one to conjure
by, and who used it without thinking it neces
sary to call himself a disciple. Or he might
have been a pagan; worse still, a Samaritan,
who, observing what wonders were wrought
by the name, ventured to use jt in his exor
cism. Some unbeliever it was, at all events,
who only cared for Christ’s name because it
gave him good help in his calling as physician
for the more mysterious diseases which, as
they were attributed to demonic possession,
were supposed to be curable by magical or
superhuman aid. Whoever the man was, and
whatever his motive may have been, so much
is clear: he did cast out spirits. That the
disciples confessed. They did not say the
man was trying to cast out spirits, or pre
tending to cast out spirits; but he was actual
ly casting them out; he was doing it success
fully. Nay, more than this: he was doing it
by the same holy agency which they used
themselves. He was confessing the very
Master whom they followed. Had they been
reasonable men they would have been greatly
delighted that men outside of their own little
persecuted body were doing their work, re
lieving them of part of their responsibility,
and proving that more agencies than they
could employ were on foot in the same cause.
They would be glad that the immense labor
of casting out demons was not committed
solely to them, but was intrusted to such a
variety of people, that its accomplishment
was made far more certain.
But these early disciples were not above
claiming a monopoly of this divine business,
though the stock was then exceedingly low,
and the dividends very uncertain and remote.
Nobody should cast out devils unless he held
to them, and belonged to their company.
They were the exclusive holders of that privi
lege, and were ready to prosecute any who
—Judgment dwelleth in man, and Respon infringed their patent. The thing must be
sibility sitteth by its side.
done by their allowance, in their way, and
�266
The Friend of Progress.
under their patronage. There might be fewer
devils cast out—that was not the point. The
business was a private one of theirs, and they
were jealous of it. Though all the devils
remained in possession, opposition in casting
them out must be stopped.
The Master’s reply to this petty jealousy
was, as usual, magnanimous. No matter
whether he is of our party or not. If he does
our work he is our friend. The main thing is
to get the devils cast out. If they do that, I
am satisfied. They may be Jews, Pagans,
Samaritans, heathen of any sort—if they suc
ceed in casting out devils, they are of our
party.
Thus, in the very life-time of the Master,
and in the very circle of his immediate friends,
began that struggle between partisanship and
charity, which has raged ever since that early
day, and which now tears apart the Christian
world. Can Christian work be monopolized?
That is the question. Can such a thing be
admitted as proprietorship in the humane and
universal? Shall ownership in truth and
charity—in moral and spiritual elemnts—be
allowed ? Is any company large enough, or
strong enough, or wise enough, or honest
enough, to take out a patent for the enlight
enment and inspiration of mankind? The
human passion for proprietorship is some
thing prodigious. It is enormous. It stops
at nothing. It ranges from earth to heaven,
from dirt to Deity. Man makes everything
his own. He would set on everything his
private seal, and make it sacred as property.
Houses and lands, personal estate, wardrobe,
horses, furniture, plate, merchandise, are not
the only things that bear the charmed name
of possessions.
The phrase, my servant,
my porter, my clerk, my friend, my child, my
husband or wife, is almost as familiar as the
phrase, my carriage, or my house; and it is
used in much the same absolute spirit.
“I would not take five thousand dollars for
that little protege' of mine,” said a friend
unwittingly to me. Love is full of private
jealousies. It cannot bear that others, not
even that humanity, not even that God, should
have any part in its beloved. It is resentful
that the interests of the race should appropri
ate the thoughts or affections of its darling.
When the dear God takes to his bosom, child
or friend, we complain that he has robbed us |
of what belonged to us as a piece of private
property.
The passion for proprietorship does not
stop with persons. It lays hold on ideas;
hangsits livery on universal truths; sets its
private stamp on the Infinite. How constant
ly we hear of “my” philosophy, “my”
creed, “ my ” system, “ my ” truth ! A man
is supposed to have reached the hight of
spiritual experiences when he can say, “my”
God. The Jews had a notion of God, which
they said was peculiar to themselves—nobody
else had it; nobody else should have it,
unless he joined them, and became a Jew.
It was their monopoly; they had a patent for
it, and jealously guarded their right, for it
secured to them the key to the kingdom.
They took great pains to keep it distinct
from every other idea of God that prevailed
in the world. They would not carry it or send
it anywhere. Whoever wanted it must come
to them and get it. Now one would say that
this niggardliness of theirs proved them unre
ligious; proved that they had no worthy idea
of God at all. No! it gains them the repu
tation of being the most religious nation on
the face of the earth. If, instead of saying
“our” God—the God of the Hebrews—the
God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—they had
said simply, ‘ ‘ God the Infinite and Eternal ”—
“all men’s God”—they would have been
reckoned little better than pagans. If, instead
of saying, “Come to us, all ye people, and we
will give you God, for we alone have him,”
they had said, “In every nation he that feareth and worketh righteousness is accepted, ”
it would have been said that they cared
no more about God than so many heathen.
To say my God—our God—is the special
mark of the saint. To say ‘1 all men’s God ”
is equivalent to saying “no. God.” When a
man can feel that he has secured a personal
or family interest in Deity—when he lias suc
ceeded in elbowing his way through the
vulgar crowd into the Divine Presence, and,
catching his eye, has extorted from him a
promise of future favor, he is said to be con
verted. The man with a new heart has ever
a long list of special providences wrought in
his behalf. It is his privilege to have a God
who singles him out from the rest of mankind,
and makes his private affairs a concern of his.
Only the unsanctified disavow this sort of pro
prietorship in Deity, contend that he rules the
world by general laws—loving no one in par
ticular—and speak of him as the Absolute,
the Infinite, the Eternal.
It follows, naturally enough, that this pri
vate possession is held in very high esteem.
�Monopoly in Religion.
267
My things are better than yours. There is no ity is the only authority conferred by the
o
house that I like so well as my own. There Spirit; my priesthood is the only priesthood
■e
is no horse like my horse. My child is a won that has the true ordination;—when a sect
ider. My friend is peerless. The circle I says: You must shout my shibboleth, or you
belong to is the choice circle. The family will be damned; you must work my organizay
from which I sprung ranks with the very first tion, or you can do nothing; this way of mine
st
for antiquity and honorableness of descent. is the only way; I have the charmed formula;
:.
There is no blood purer than the blood in my these men outside are Infidels; they are doing
y
veins. Aristocrats are we .all, somewhere. harm; their influence is bad; God does not
!.
My town ranks the country—my country is favor people who deny these doctrines which
s
the chosen’ spot of the earth. This little we hold, and neglect those practices which
e
infirmity of private conceit in ordinary life we follow; when a doctor of divinity says in a
e
and in small matters, we pass by with a lecture: “If a man believes the creed, he has
smile; but in graver matters it becomes seri.- a faith ; if he denies it, he has a philosophy,
ous. When Religion thus overworks the per and Anti-Christ is a philosopher ;” it is time to
sonal pronoun—when Religion emphasizes say that the divine grace has not made itself
s
the I, the me, the our, the us—when Religion over to any denomination or party ; that for
i
lets its sunshine and its rain fall upon this seed the matter of need, God needs none of us.
1
of individuality, till from it there shall spring
5
The idea that this little clique of theologia tree whose top touches the heaven—when ans, who cannot even define their own terms,
i
Religion makes this me a mountain whose should pretend to hold so much as a small
3
summit overtops the country round, and ac latch-key to a back door unto the kingdom of
commodates the court of Jupiter and all the use and beauty ! The idea that this church,
ì
Gods—when Religion gives its divine sanc whose history is stained with blood, should
tion to this idea of ownership, and allows a pretend that only she can make men white !
i
man to think that his opinion is the final This, too, in a world which has seen churches
1
truth; that his way of saving men is the only rise and fall like waves, under the blowing of the
7
way by which men can be saved; that his invisible Spirit ! This in a world which has
J
church is the providential institution, outsidej seen systems chase each other across the sky
of which is no salvation—it is time to look; of thought like clouds! This in a world
about and ask what it means. Some fieldsj which has seen vast institutions dry up like
certainly must be rescued from this exorbitant mist in the dawn! This in a world where
;
claim of proprietorship. When the Reformer• mighty results are brought about by trifling
says to his fellow-men, “You who wish to aidI causes, which no man could see a moment in
men to throw off this great burden of abuse, advance, and where the most tremendous
to deliver Jhemselves from this particular■ efforts of organized man have so often failed
oppression, to emancipate themselves from. to accomplish anything! This in a world
this special sin, must come into my party, where a thousand agencies cross and recross
take my oath, adopt my tenets, use my spe one another, doing the perfect will from
cific; we shall count you against us unless moment to moment !
you join our society, and wear our badge;
It is said, I know, that this feeling of private *
for nobody can do this thing but we; wheu ownership is the only guaranty that people
the Temperance reformer, for instance, brings will take an interest in the work they are set
out his pledge of total abstinence, and bids to do. Men care tor their own ; and as their
you sign and circulate it, as the only means own, will work for it, save for it, live and die
of stopping the curse of intemperance, and for it ; while for that which is not their own,
on penalty of being reckoned an enemy of the they will lift no finger and give no dollar.
inebriate if you decline; when he says: All The selfish feeling of proprietorship keeps the
other devices are worse than useless; every world a going; just as water, till it is forced
other doctrine than this of mine is damning; to flow between banks, spreads out into a
every other society than this of mine is a pre marsh, overflows valuable territory, rots the
tense ; it is time to declare that there is work land and the trees, gives play-ground to slimy
so broad and radical that it needs all earnest snakes and frogs, and keeps the country
men to do it. When a church says: In my about well supplied with fevers for grave
communion alone is salvation; my sacraments : yards; so men and women become—we are
are the only genuine sacraments; my author- i told—shallow and stagnant and pestilential,
�268
The Friend of Progress.
till you set them at work for their own pri
vate interest. It is of no use to talk of
humanity and justice and the welfare of the
race. People are kind to themselves and to
those who belong to them, and to no others.
Public buildings may burn, but each individual
takes care that his house does not take fire.
The mother no doubt is very fond and foolish
and tiresome, and kindless, who thinks that
never a sweet babe was born till her darling
came into the world; but unless she did think
so, she would not nurse the baby, and carry
it through all the perils of infancy. Who
would do for another’s child from sentiments
of humanity, for heaven’s sake or for God’s
sake, what she does for her own child, for her
own sake ? The sentiment of ownership is,
we are assured, the main-spring of life. To
turn the wheel of existence, love must be set
running through a sluice-way. The coldhearted man provides bountifully for his own
family; watches jealously over his daughters;
educates carefully his sons; spares no pains
and no cost for health, instruction, culture;
spends his life, in fact, in the effort to train
this little plant of his so that it shall bear
beautiful blossoms and rich fruit—all the
while priding himself supremely on its thrifti
ness and beauty. He is improving his own
property, and increasing his own possessions.
You do not find him doing that, or anything
like it, for those who are not his own; but
he keeps his little garden-plot weeded. The
patriot will fight for his country and her insti
tutions, whatever they may be, and will send
his sons to fight and bleed for them too;
exulting in their glorious death when they go
down into premature graves. There is no
devotion like his. Poets make it the theme
of their song; orators make it the source of
their inspiration; historians use it as the best
material for the holy traditions that bind the
generations of national existence together,
and warm up a people’s heart with grand
memories of valor and sacrifice. The man
without a country—rather the man whose
country is the world—the man who can claim
one country as being his own as much as
another—the man who, instead of being rooted
to a little island, has the freedom of the
globe—whose countrymen are all mankind—
never does anything like this. He will not
fight for a flag; he will not engage in a
national struggle; he will not sing patriotic
songs, or lay down his life that a people may
be tree; because no people is his people, no
songs are his songs, no nation is his nation,
and no flag is his flag. He has nothing spe
cially at stake. His pride is not enlisted;
his self-love is not appealed to; his vanity is
not excited; and so for him all causes are
indifferent; all revolutions alike interesting
or uninteresting; all struggles equally mo
mentous or idle; all flags but silken symbols
of nationalities'in which he has no special
concern; and the convulsions of states are
but so many social movements of which he is
a curious spectator. The largest expense in
the grand patriotic demonstration of February
22 was incurred by the people whp wanted to
display their sign-boards.
The man who cares nothing for the social
ties that link men together, upon whose ear
the words “human brotherhood” come with
an unmeaning sound, who has no conception
of a unity as existing between himself and his
fellow-men, and will consequently do nothing
to promote that unity, may become intensely
interested in his church, because it is his
church—the church of which he is a pillar
and in which he is a proprietor—and in the
act of building up that by enlarging its mem
bership, filling its meetings, augmenting its
sociability, enriching its communion and ves
per services, adorning and beautifying its
sanctuary, he will help make a bond of unity
felt among a number of his fellow-beings; he
may create a limited brotherhood of human
souls, and may build a sheepfold or a home
where the imperiled may find shelter and the
outcast may find rest. All the time it is his
church, his church, that is uppermost in his
thoughts; but it cannot be his church without
being also the church of many human souls
besides himself.
Or take another illustration. There was a
meeting at the Academy in behalf of the sol
diers—called by the officers and friends of the
Christian Commission. There was nothing
remarkable in the published list of speakers,
or in anything else, to attract a crowd. But
the crowd was there—immense, crushing.
Interest rose to the pitch of excitement. The
appeals of the orators roused the audience to
enthusiasm, and when the collection was
taken up, people, instead of following the
usual custom—of searching for a small piece
of currency among the bills—poured out the
entire contents of their purses; nay, took
the rings from their fingers, the chains from
their necks, the bracelets from their arms,
the watches from their pockets, and flung
�Monopoly in Religion.
them promiscuously into the pile of trea
sure.
■What prompted this extraordinary generos
ity ? A feeling of humanity ? Sympathy with
suffering ? A conviction of the soldiers’ needs ?
Why, those needs had been presented to them
hy the Sanitary Commission for four years.
For four years eloquent speakers had been
arguing, exhorting, appeali^, praying for
money for these very soldiers, from these very
people. But they did not touch this sensitive
sectarian sentiment. They did not ventilate
the personal pronoun. They did not say,
“we, we,” but only “they, they.” They did
not forbid those that followed not with them.
‘ ‘ Cast out the devils, ” they said, 1 ‘ and we are
satisfied.” But the devils were not cast out.
Now comes a body that adopts the narrow
sectarian policy, holds out hope of sectarian
aggrandizement, pricks the spirit of sectarian
vanity and conceit, and jealously shouts,
“we, we ”—our denomination—owr church—
and the charity sprouts up like coal oil in
Pennsylvania.
What will not men do for the sake of their
own souls, who will do nothing for the sake
of the bodies and souls of all Christendom 1
Speak to them of justice, of humanity, of the
claims of a common kindred in God, of the
poor man’s need, the sick man’s misery, the
stupid man’s ignorance, the weak man’s vice,
the wicked man’s turpitude and sin, and they
are as immovable as rocks. Frighten them a
little about the safety of their private souls,
and there is no end to their charity. Make
alms-giving a private business, the chief pro
fits whereof are to accrue to themselves—gua
rantee to them a special interest in the kingdom
of heaven—and you rouse them to such effort as
will make a desert blossom. The premium
on private seats in heaven built the Church of
St. Peter.
Seeing all this, people argue that monopoly
in religion is a good thing; that narrowness
in church life is a good thing; that sectarian
ism is a good thing; that every kind of pious
partisanship is a good thing; that the constant
over-working of the personal pronoun “I,”
1 ‘ we, ” ‘ ‘ ours, ” “ us, ” is a good thing. Is it ?
Was that rebuke of John well bestowed ? Is it
well to say to people: Cultivate your exclusive
ness, if it is only in exclusiveness and through
exclusiveness that you will work—insist that no
man shall cast out devils at all unless he will
cast them out in your way—is it well to say
this?
269
•
Remembering who it was that rebuked this
disposition when it first showed itself among
his own disciples, let us consider this point.
Granted that men work more intensely
when they work for their own denomination,
church, party, organization, sect, corporate
interest—granting that the effort to monopo
lize power, authority, privilege, prestige,
to triumph over rivals, to get patronage away
from competitors, is the mainspring of all
intensity of labor—the question still remains:
Is the work done, the work required ? Are
the demons cast out ? Are none but demons
cast out? When the zealous John forbade
the casting out of devils by that outsider,
because he did not join his company, was
he not thinking a little more of his com
pany than he was of the dispossession of the
demons? And was he not more interested
in the gathering in of followers than he was
in the driving out of devils ? And presently,
when Paul came along and proposed to cast
out heathen demons, on another plan, did not
this same John think that the integrity and
compactness and orthodox consistency of the
Jerusalem church would more than compen
sate for the weeding of the Lord’s garden?
Did he not vote that Paul was little better
than a demon himself, because he divided the
company and drew some away ?
The close churchman, the narrow sectary,
the exclusive partisan, becomes so absorbed
in his church, his sect, his party, that he for
gets there are any demons to be cast out.
He may give, work, toil, spend, apparently
for objects outside; but it is always for objects
inside. He bestows only on himself. He
flings the gold away from him with most
impetuous and lavish hand; but flings it in
such a way, that, like the Indian boomerang,
it comes directly back to his own hand.
Partisanship in morals and religion strength
ens nothing but itself. It is very doubtful if
mankind are any better for it. It is true, no
doubt, that, to a certain extent, the poor are
aided, the hungry are fed, the naked are
clothed; but this is done indirectly, inciden
tally, as a means to an end, and in a spirit
that makes the utility of it very questionable;
for with every gift of clothing or money goes
something of the Phariseeism that bestows it.
The Christian Commission will, of course,
render much assistance to the soldiers in camp
and hospital; but with every package of sup
plies will go a package of tracts; every bun
dle of clothing will contain just so many suits
�270
The Friend of Progress.
of sectarian livery; every bottle of medicine
will be folded in wrappers indicating the spir
itual drug-gist it came from, and soliciting
patronage for the firm; every pair of shoes
will suggest to the sore-footed recipient the
strait and narrow way of orthodoxy, by which
alone he can find the kingdom of heaven; and
every blanket, as it is put on, will remind the
shivering man of certain filthy rags of infidel
ity, which must be put off. The temporal
estate of some denomination is the thing to
be improved, after all. The soldiers must
follow after us. I make bold to say, for my
own part, that the good done to the soldiers is
slight, as compared with the evil done to the
cause of religion. It would be better, in my
judgment, every way, that the soldiers should
have nothing beyond what the government
can furnish them with, than that this enor
mous vice of sectarianism should grow. It
were better that the demon of cold and hun
ger and pain should not be expelled, than
that the far more terrible demon of religious
partisanship should take possession. If we
could break down the principle of monopoly
in faith, we could richly afford to let the world
take its chance with its physical and social
ills.
It will have to take its chance with these at
any rate. What does the costly religion of
New York, supported by these most munifi
cent sectarians, do toward diminishing the
burden of excessive taxation, lessening the
fearful rate of mortality among the poorer
classes of citizens, stopping the gaping sources
of disease that belch out streams of poisoned
air in every foul street, providing that the
children should be saved from the wholesale
murder to which they are exposed through
the neglect of Street Commissioners, or saving
the poor from the outrageous and merciless
spoliations of their rulers ? We New Yorkers
live daily on the very brink of destruction.
All the demons are let loose upon us: foul
odors, dirt, putrefaction, the elements of every
conceivable disease, beggary, thievery, vice
in every variety; and the Citizen’s Associa
tion cannot find ten good men to undertake
its gigantic sanitary work. The organiza
tions that represent the law and will of God
are busy filling their quotas for the ranks of
saints in the world to come.
A sure way, perhaps, of effecting the sani
tary reform of the city, would be to fire some
body of sectaries with the idea that it would
redound greatly to its religious reputation
and its denominational power, to redeem the
city from its filth. Let there be a rivalry
started among the churches as to which should,
glean the richest harvest of converts from the
poor who were saved from pestilence and the
rich who were saved from pillage—let some
“ Christian Association ” be induced to under
take the work of cleaning our augean stables
for the “lovt^of souls,” and in a very few
weeks our city would rival Paris in the exqui
site cleanliness of its streets, the complete
ness of its sewerage, the admirable ventilation
of its dwellings, the absolute abatement of all
its nuisances, and the beauty of its municipal
appointments. The demons of the earth
would be expelled, but in their place we should
have demons of the air; an atmosphere filled
with controversial and theological dust; heaps
of evangelical tracts; a police watch set at
the avenues of thought. When the unclean
spirit had gone out, into the swept and gar
nished city would come seven other spirits
more wicked than he, and the last state of
that man might be worse than the first.
For this disposition, illustrated by John,
conjures up more d mons than it lays. Nay,
it leaves the real demons in full possession,
and goes to work to expel as demons what
there is ground for believing are no demons
at all, but the saving spirits of the earth.
The test of any faith is that it casts out
demons; but the people who say that none
but they have authority or power to cast out
demons, simply assail as demons all who try
to cast out demons in a different way from
theirs. Every sect is demonic in the eyes of
every other sect. The list of the arch-fiends
whom Christendom has tried to cast out is
rather remarkable. St. Paul heads it. At
long intervals follow Huss, Jerome, Savona
rola, Luther, Servetus, Latimer, Ridley, Chan
ning, Parker—all men who fought real devils
to some purpose. Church does its best to
exorcise church, denomination to dispossess
denomination, party to put party under the
ban; while ignorance, want, suffering, sor
row, limitation, imbecility, sit moping and
gibbering on the hearts of human kind.
The Pope of Rome, in whose holy city
800,000 francs are annually spent in masses,
while 214,000 suffice for public instruction,
issues his manifesto, in which he pronounces
accurst and summons the faithful to expel
some half hundred or more of spirits which
we in America are accustomed to consider
the very guardian angels of our social estate.
�Monopoly in Religion.
But you will find that the different parties in
Christendom have their devils too, in whose
expulsion they are as much interested as he
is in his; and of those devils he is reckoned
the chief.
The test of a faith is its power to cast out
demons. But who shall tell us what the
demons are? It is very easy to say, Cast
out devils; but thus far it has resulted in
Christians trying to cast out one another, and
letting the devils remain in possession.
Who shall tell us what the devils are? 0
friends! we cannot know what they are, till
we are delivered from the prince of them,
which is the spirit of Phariseeism, and exclu
siveness, and monopoly. We canno’t know
what they are, until we come out of our sec
tarian corners and ecclesiastical closets,
where we have been so long barricaded, and
standing in the open plains of humanity, ask
ourselves what it is that injures Man; what
'Curses society at large; what depraves and
eradicates human nature; not what weakens
our party, shakes our organization, enfeebles
the influence of our church. When we can
forget the personal pronoun entirely—forget
that we have an establishment to build up—
forget that we have a denomination to sustain
—forget that we have a church to fill—forget
that we have a private spiritual interest to
serve—forget that we have a system to defend
and promulgate—and only remember* that
God has a truth to serve—then, and not till
then, shall we know what the demons are
that we are called to cast out. Then we may
discover, possibly, that the first demon is the
spirit which we have been all along cherishing
as angel: the hunger for personal or partisan
appropriation—the rage for spoils in the
heavenly kingdom. The faith that makes
men large and liberal—call itself what it may
—is the true faith. The faith that delivers men
from their limitations, stirs them from their
stupor, makes them ashamed of their igno
rance, puts down unwarranted authority,
expels from their bosoms the fear of God,
exorcises the spirit of distrust and timidity,
of doubt respecting themselves and the world
they live in—the faith that gives them confi
dence in their power to find the truth, and in
the power of natural and providential agencies
to get them out of their misery—no matter
what ugly name it may happen to bear—is
good faith. Call it orthodoxy, heterodoxy,
heresy, infidelity, secularism, pantheism, or
whatever else is most obnoxious in title—if it
271
casts out the demons of ignorance, lethargy,
stupor, blindness, and servility of mind—if it
expels the spirit of tame acquiescence and
dumb submission to want and misery—if it
drives out cowardice and credulity and super
stition—if it is a spirit of liberation, it is good.
It may not be for our church—it cannot be
against our influence.
Jesus said bitterly one day: “A man’s foes
are they of his own household.” Indeed they
are. The foes of a man are they that bar his
way out into generous relations with his fellow
creatures and his God—bosom foes all—
demons of the threshold: domestic luxury,
personal exclusiveness, family pride, social
contempt, sectarian zeal, church foppery.
God help us to put these things away. God
help us to love truth more than opinion,
society more than sect, the community more
than the church, him more than ourselves.
Then we shall find ourselves in possession of
the charm that casts out every demon.
When will men understand that they are
powerful only when they serve the truth—that
they must always be weak when they patronize
it ? When will men understand that they gain
nothing by appropriating ideas to themselves,
and insisting on their monopoly being re
spected? Just as all our back yards—now so
dark and moldy and grassless and forlorn—
would each and all be green and blooming if
we would pull down the high fences that shut
out light and air, and in place of them put up
open inclosures of iron-work, through which
the breeze would circulate—so each one of
our opinions and credences would gain in
vitality if the sectarian barricade were removed
and the common air of heavenly truth allowed
to sweep over and freshen the whole. In God
we cannot lose ourselves—we always find our
selves. We lose ourselves out o’f him. The
universal never drowns us—it saves us from
drowning. The very largest charity, while it
seems likely to let the man ran out and be
drained off, serves to let the great spirit run
in and fill him up frill. Do you lose your
breath when you open your windows to the
air of heaven ?
Every great example takes hold of us with
the authority of a miracle, and says to us,
If ye had but faith, ye should also be able to
do the things which I do.—Jacobi.
It is impossble to be a hero in anything,
unless one is first a hero in faith.—id.
�272
The Friend of Progress.
The Friend of Progress.
C. M. Plumb & Co., Publishers.
NEW YORK, JULY, 1865.
Mr. Towne’s Survey of Mr. Beecher’s Beliefs
and Opinions will be resumed in our next
number, and probably be completed in the
number following. The contribution for this
month is unavoidably delayed.
The Psychometrical Delineation of the
Character of Abraham Lincoln, to be found
upon another page, is published not so much
for the purpose of adding another to the
many individual opinions of our late Presi
dent, as for the sake of the peculiar method
of the examination, and its striking harmony
with the character revealed to the nation in
the career of Mr. Lincoln, since 1861, when
the examination was made and first pub
lished.
The Truth in Error.
That the human mind is naturally truthful,
is no less evident from the efforts of liars than
from the credulity of the honest. Were we as
enamored of the face of falsehood as of that
of truth, the task of the hypocrite would be
needless, as a lie might flaunt its own colors
without disparagement. Counterfeits are only
profitable where a sound currency is their
basis.
We ought then to expect a show of truth in
all the professions of men, and where a doc
trine has been passed down from age to age,
till it has become the spiritual and mental life
of thousands, we should look for a reality of
truth, as well as the specious appearance of
it in that life-creed. Where men are persist
ent in their exercise of gnawing theological
husks, it is safe to conclude that some kernel
enlivens their dry fodder, or that they have
power to assimilate even husks, and derive
from them a little spiritual nutriment.
Often we have only to translate the idea
from the cant of the conventicle into the lan
guage of common sense, to get a very appre
ciable fact out of a very abominable dogma.
A kernel of good sense may be wrapped up
for a thousand years in the unsavory mummy
foldings of a creed, and yet retain vitality
enough to germinate under the free air and
sunshine, in the natural soil of unsanctified’
thought. Thus the doctrine of total depravity,
the existence of which in the mind of any
sane man is the nearest approach to its de
monstration that so gross a doctrine is capable
of, has in its loathsome wrappings a little
mummy wheat which does not refuse to vege
tate when carefully separated from its dismal
surroundings, and nursed by a purely human
philosophy. The venerable Assembly of
Westminster Divines put forth the conclusion,
pithily summed up in that juvenile distich:
•
“In Adam’s fall
We sinned all,”
and backed it up by certain hideous commen
taries and consequences, in which their disci
ples discovered that hell, already well “paved
with good intentions,” was paved anew
“with infantsnot a span long,” McAdmalzed
with these little offshoots of Adam’s depravity!
Now just as this double outrage upon God
and Man is getting to smell too decidedly of
the very ancient sarcophagus from which it
was exhumed, while the very divines are
making a bonfire of the bituminous rags and
dusty hide of the old mummy, a vital fact
drops out of the old cerements, and takes
root in the mind—the fact that certain tenden
cies are hereditary, that men do partake, not
of the flaws only, but of the virtues and talents
ot their ancestors.
Some time since men learned, on the purely
animal plane of philosophy, that horses,
cows, and sheep owe much to parentage; and
vast sums of money and no little care have
been bestowed on the physical perfection of
the lower races, with very marked advantages.
Of course it would be very distasteful to apply
the principles of good sense to the perfection
of the animal man, for a tender regard to>
delicacy and propriety seem to require that
man-culture should be suffered to go on at
haphazard, in transgression of all laws that
happen to lie across the path of a blind pas
sion, or a dazzled fancy, and let God take
care of the cripples and monsters that are
bred of such folly. But with all deference to
the squeamishness of the very delicate, it may
be suggested that a better “improvement”
might have been drawn from the venerable'
text of transmitted depravity.
The one grand fact long buried in the mon
strous creed, has not yet been sown widely
enough to effect the race; nor will it, till men
learn to pluck the pearl of truth out bf the
�Education.
muck-heap, instead of scratching there for
worms, like the foolish cock in the fable. If
the good God would speak to us audibly, as he
does in every fact of his providence, or in
other words, if we would listen to the true
teachings of Nature, our human homes would
cease to be mere nurseries of blights and
abortions, and our youth no longer marrying
the sons and daughters of Cain, instead of
those of Enos, men and women would be so
well bom the first time, they would not need
to be born again.
B.
Education.
Every child must receive an education, and
that education must consist of a double train
ing—a training of the mind and a training of
the body to invigorate the mind.
Moreover, education must be of such a na
ture that, first, every child shall learn to
think for itself, independently of master and
authority; second, it shall be furnished with
a knowledge of things rather than words; and
third, the mode of teaching shall be such, and
the nature of the things taught of such a real,
practical character, that the moral and reli
gious instincts shall receive at every instant
increase of strength and gratification.
1. To teach a child unselfishness and con
sideration for others, the teacher must begin
by setting an example of unselfishness in not
forcing upon the pupil his own opinions, com
ments, or interpretations, or that of any
authority, however much venerated of old,
when those opinions do not at once coincide
with the receptive mind. No matter how
quaint, crooked, irreligious or dreadful, the
objections of the child to old traditions, socalled beliefs, and fables, may be, a respect
for the mind working within, and common
sense, should teach us not violently to enforce
our ideas upon it. That violence, even if it
were in favor of the most evident truth, de
moralizes the child, and renders it incapable,
in general, of arriving by its own original ef
forts at the truth thus forced upon it. It will
learn to hate the truth, and the creature thus
trained will only become as a man, a hypo
crite, a mocker in his heart, and a constitu
tional liar.
As religion is the embodiment of truth
itself, the enforcement of what is to the mind
an untruth, a fable, a contradiction, an im
piety—however lovely and divine your own
thought and long habit may have made it—is
273
the first corroding agent, the world’s ignorant
and selfish want of consideration for others,
imposes on the child. The mind ready and
fresh for truth receives in this way its first
degradation. The ignorant ask for submis
sion merely; instead of seeking to give that
Light, which must be free to be true.
In the old time, history was an exaggera
tion; religion, fairy tales; literature, in
ventions; poetry, extravagance; science and
medicine, quackery; law, the whim and bru
tality of the judge. Through this Slough of
Despond the human mind had to march. From
infancy to old age, violence was done to it; so
that the child was almost invariably a preco
cious enemy of every truth and of every good
impulse—an embodiment of hypocrisy of con
duct, violence in action, and submission to
authority from abject fear. The physiogno
mist traces still on the countenances of almost
all, that inexpressible want of manly expres
sion, which, like the word Mystery on the
forehead of the Beast, has been written on
the face by this chaos of contradictions, su
perstitions, and violations of the moral right
to free thought.
To systematically destroy the originality of
the pupil’s mind, is the wanton act of the
barbarous and unintelligent teacher. The
selfish man is unwilling that the scholar
should deviate from the methods and ideas
which have dwarfed himself. He strives,
therefore, to maintain his own authority, and
uses the authority of the ignorant past as a
means to this end.
Take the artist’s studio as an example. An
exaggerated veneration is created for the
Michael Angelos and Raphaels of art. This ven
eration is due not merely to the actual talents
of those artists, but more to the fact of the in
cessant repetition of the same praises—praises
given and yielded to by the worshipers
without a thought of investigating the sub
ject for themselves. The teacher insists, and
denounces any doubt or question with indig
nation ! Had the pupil been allowed to ex
amine and criticise for himself, hewoukl have
discovered in all authorities defects and in
feriorities. But under the influence of master
and the jeers of his fellow-students, the
youthful aspirant gives his whole soul to the
adoration of the mannerisms and faults of the
artist-saints, and losing by degrees bis own
natural originality, becomes a mere imitator
or painter-ape.
We want to study the works of others by an
�274
The Friend of Progress.
incessant examination or criticism of them—
thus using them as a stepping-stone, and not
a stumbling-block, to our own improvement
and progress.
2. Things are better than words. When
we know wliat a thing is, then the words of
the book are full of meaning and information
as to its nature, its habits, its history, &c., &c.
What is h-o-m-e as letters put together as a
word, to a child, which has had no means of
associating the sound of the word or the
combination of the letters, with the family
circle and living-place ? What is g-l-a-s-s, as a
combination of letters to form a word without
a view of the object? When transparent?
when opaque ? How brittle ? Can it compre
hend ? Does it know how it is made ? Then
bring the materials, and make it, so that as
this and other objects are presented in their
reality and demonstrated in their various
combinations, the child may insensibly learn
the elements of chemistry and other sciences
and arts.
There are a thousand facts of creation
which children ought to know before they are
out of childhood, which most men know
nothing about, so wretched is our training.
The child-mind is an inexhaustible source
of curiosity, and every fact which it re
ceives becomes so completely a part ol
itself, that the future man is the work
ing product of this constructed mental ma
chine. It will know—it puts endless ques
tions—it asks the meaning of every word it
sees or hears, and wants to see and handle
and manipulate every (to it; unknown ob
ject—to search out its cause—to investigate
its character and nature—ascertain and apply
its uses. Education, then, must be a mass of
mentally digested things and facts, about
which there can be no mystification—no de
ception—no lie.
When the things are known and the facts
are ascertained, words are easily found for
every species of demonstration. That is an
art of itself—the word art—but secondary, not
as heretofore, the first point of education.
The pressure of word-teaching upon the
brain has been such that millions of educated
children have had nearly all incipient talent
crushed out of them. Mere book-learning,
stale, dry, and unprofitable word-gabble, has
been the vampire of our school-system. While
things seen and felt leave an indelible impress,
the vague word-description of the unseen and
unknown thing leaves confusion and suggests
absurdities. The unhealthy, crazy conceits,
attachments to old errors, credulity about
what is clearly false, and blindness to the
practical evidences of the senses, is one form
of word-education. The mind dwells and
lingers in an evil-disposed chaos ol contra
dictory, artificial, and arbitrary thoughts.
3. A perfect disorder of intellect is the
growth of our chaotic system of education.
It is the intellectual man that is generally the
most prejudiced and the most blind to simple
and positive truths and facts. And as all he
has learnt has been forced upon him under
the influence of flattery—the teacher of the
false instinctively knows the repulsiveness
of the absurdities he is impressing, and so
uses evil’s last resource—he, (the intellectual
victim,) under the belief thus adroitly imposed
upon him, hates what is new, rejects discovepies and denies facts, because they open up to
him the falsities of his labors and credulities,
and shock his selfishness by threatening to
diminish the profits of the business or pro
fession to which he has been ignorantly har
nessed.
The struggle of the intellect of the nineteenth
century is to get rid of that intellectual blind
ness, which has stayed the progress of mind
in all past times. A blindness which is the
fruit of the imposture of words and phrases—of
their incomplete, uncomprehended, miscon
strued meaning—of their wrongly interpreted,
translated, and misprinted passages—of num
berless interpolations, pious frauds, and rav
ings of iusane persons, passing among the
vulgar of the time for holy men and women—
of excessive admiration for certain authors and
authorities—[Shakespeare for example, the
most obscure passages in which, arising
probably from errors of the printer, are
oftenest admired]—of rapt enthusiasm for
legal quibbles, medical quackeries, pious
fables, and scientific absurdities. These stum
bling-blocks to truth, men are now struggling
to remove; but it cannot be thoroughly done,
except by a change of our system of educa
tion from the too exclusive study of words, to
a more thorough study of things, beginning
at the earliest age.
When we reflect that the greatest intellects
of the past have, with few exceptions, been
dupes of the most irrational superstitions
and scientific falsities, and that great and
simple truths almost invariably have come
from men who had no classical or scientific
education, and add to these facts our own
�experience that simple and positive truths are
almost always accepted and comprehended
intuitively by simple-minded persons and the
young, we shall at once see with what care
and suspicion we should receive the “wis
dom” of the past.
Self-made men—intellectually speaking—
are generally modest in proportion to the
greatness and earnestness of the truth that is
in them. College-made men are almost inva
riably conceited, even, when they have some
intellectual ability. This fault arises from the
mode of teaching. Instead of the “moral and
religious instincts receiving at every instant
increase of strength and gratification, ” their
literary education is held upto them constantly
as a subject of pride in contradistinction to the
ignorance of the people; and this pride runs
through all the professions, with this addition
to the religious, that it is inculcated in all
persons, high and low, rich and poor—by the
sects as one against the other—and is thus
made the great backbone of all the falsities,
as it is of all the vices and crimes of society.
Hence a simple truth, spoken at the be
ginning of the first century, was just as repul
sive to the educated man of that day, as it is
now in the nineteenth century. It was to
the simple and ignorant in a literary point
of view, that the truth was addressed, in de
spair of convincing the irrational acuteness
of the pocket-interested of the age. This ir
rational acuteness pretends to demonstrate
logically the truth of fables that are scientific
absurdities ; and is just a part of that system
of unreasoning to sustain falsehoods, super
stitions, and interested fictions, which have so
long characterized the schools.
To moralize education, then, we must
make it general, and direct it out of the mire
of mere word-study, into that of the demon
stration of the realities and wonders of the
creation. The pride of sect—that curse and
degradation of humanity for the support of
idlers—must be broken up ; and that can only
be by making truth free to all—for the truth
shall make all free.
From the earliest infancy the child is
dragged to the Sunday-school to learn words
of self-esteem and mystification ; and to the
church to hear these commented and dogma
tized upon and sustained, as proved, by quo
tations, questionable extracts, and fabled
sayings and doings of beings who have or
have not existed. All is in the vague. He is
told every day, every hour, that his sect is
better than others—consequently that he—
however ignorant, or unworthy—is better
than others! This great crime is the begin
ning of his degradation as a man—he is
practically lowered to the grade of the ani
mal, the criminal—and his actions towards
his brethren subsequently, show by their vio
lence of word and deed the effect of the
training.
But when you take the child, and putting
aside the love of slander and hatred incul
cated by the old system, simply teach him the
great truths found in the wonders of God’s
creation, there is no room for selfish feelings,
but ample space for admiration, and enthusi
asm, and love of the Creator and all that he
has made. The children of the common Fa
ther learn instinctively that all are brothers.
The intellect develops without effort, and the
moral feelings are kept in healthy activity.
The mind exclusively occupied in acquiring
new scientific facts, finds no time for mere
lancies, theories and superstitions. It builds
not on sand, but on rock. Fairy tales, novels,
fables, and barefaced assertions will lose
their influence—compromises with evils, with
injustice in the guise of law, with quackery in
the guise of medicine, with superstition in the
guise of religion, with assertions in the guise
of science, will end. And with the progress
of a purified intellect may we expect a more
correct appreciation of the laws which should
govern society, and such an application of
them as will obliterate in time those social
evils which have so iong disgraced humanitvA."
BY CORA L. V. H ATC H .
Youngest, rarest household treasure;
Source of constant care and pleasure;
Bud of promise; gem of beauty;
Idol of home’s love and duty—
Babe Mabel!
Eyes as blue as mirrored ether;
Earth and heaven blent together;
Roses, girt with lily’s blossom,
Paling upon neck and bosom—
Fair Mabel!
Form of shape and mold most, human,
Fittest for a future woman;
Sweet caprices; frowning, smiling,
Baby anger; now beguiling—
Sweet Mabel!
Eager face and lips upturning;
Proffered kisses often spurning;
Giving love when none are wooing;
Busy ever with undoing—
Witch Mabel I
Body poised, its balance trying;
Arms outstretched, like wings, for flying;
Little feet, uncertain, straying,
Life’s first journey just essaying—
Brave Mabel!
Longer journeys are before thee;
May as loving ones bend o’er thee;
And, when sterner tasks are calling,
May Heaven’s arms shield thee from falling,.
Bear Mabel!
�The Triend of Progress.
^Relations of the Indians and the
General Government.
BY CAPTAIN R. J. HINTON, U. S. C. T.
The last Congress took steps towards a
thorough investigation of the present position
and relation of the Indians to the General
Government, by the appointment of a Con
gressional Commission to visit the tribes, and
make such investigations as the subject de
manded. It also considered, though it did
not pass, a bill securing a territorial civil or
ganization for the Indian territory, south of
Kansas. Senator Doolittle, of Wisconsin, one
of the ablest and most humane members of
the U. S. Senate, is at the head of the Investi
gating Commission, and this with the presence
of the Hon. James Harlan, of Iowa, in the
Secretaryship of the Interior, are evidences
that a wiser and more equitable adjustment of
the status of the American Indian is about to
take place.
When it shall be generally known that
during the progress of the great rebellion, we
have maintained an army against Indians,
larger than the entire regular army was be
fore the rebellion; when we remember that we
have had two outbreaks of a most disastrous
character; that of Minnesota in 1862, and
that on the overland and Santa Fe Mail
Roads and the settlements contiguous thereto,
with the murder of several hundred unpro
tected settlers, the interruption of our interoceanic lines of travel, and the robbery and
destruction of at least five millions dollars of
goods and stock, it will be granted that the
necessity for a thorough overhauling of our
Indian policy is most imperative. We have
maintained and now have in the field about
fifteen thousand men altogether, employed in
looking after the Indians. General Dodge,
commanding in Kansas, has two expeditions
in the field, and with the troops guarding the
great routes, must have at least six thousand
men in this service. General Curtis, com
manding the North-West Department, has
about five thousand, half of whom are in the
field, the remainder holding the frontier
posts, and forts on the upper Missouri. Gen.
Conner has at least a brigade in Utah, mainly
employed in checking Indian depredations.
The Department of the Pacific has considera
ble expeditions in the Humboldt region, in
Washington, and a large force in Arizona.
At no time in the history of the Govern
ment has the necessity been so apparent, of
devising some plan of dealing with the Abo
riginal tribes under our control, alike humane
towards them, just to our own citizens, and
comprehensive enough to meet the expansion
and true growth of the country. The rebellion
has broken many idols. It has made the
nation conquer its prejudices. War is the
sternest of logicians. The premises once ac
cepted, its conclusions cannot be contro
verted. One lesson it practically enforces,
and that is the duty which devolves upon
power, to aid the weak and defend the op
pressed. The present struggle affords mani
fold occasions to the statesman to lay broad
the foundations of equitable administration.
It compels our executive and legislative in
cumbents to recognize that America means
Man, not Caste, and that Democracy repre
sents the race, and not condition.
In this spirit we would deal with the
question under discussion. The public mind,
even yet in these days of crowding events,
retains the terrible recollections of the Minnesota massacres. On the other hand, while
we remember with loathing the race that
committed such deeds, we also have brought
to us, as a companion, yet diverse picture, the
story of the endurances, suffering, valor and
sacrifices—deeds done in behalf of the Union
by loyal Indians, on our south-western
frontier.
The amazing discoveries of the precious
metals in our continental mountain-ranges,
and consequent rapid development in popu
lation and wealth of the territories newly
formed there, demand also the adoption of a
just and comprehensive policy for the present
and prospective government of the Indian
tribes, who roam the Sierras Madre and Ne
vada and their connecting mountain chains.
Whatever policy is proposed, or whatever
measures be adopted, there should be a care
ful avoidance on the one hand of the senti
mentalism which has often characterized
discussions of this subject, and on the other,
of the crushing-out spirit of the practical
West. The romance which attaches itself in
the minds of many with relation to the In
dian character, fades rapidly into a very
sensible disgust, wherever we are brought
into contact with the tribes scattered through
out oui’ broad domain. This disgust is hightened most sensibly by the fact, that in the
new States and- Territories, Indian Reserva
tions are the choicest lands as to situation
�Relations of the Indians and the General Government.
and quality. This excites the white settler’s
cupidity and consequent animosity. The fact
may be cause for regret; but it is true.
Human nature is imperfect, and must be
dealt with as such. It cannot be questioned
that the policy of treating with the tribes as
dependent nationalities, is a mistaken one.
They have none of the elements—are within
the limits of the Union, and under its authori
ty. The land belongs by the highest law to
those who subdue it to the uses of civiliza
tion. It cannot be surrendered to or con
trolled by an idle race, marked by a savage
individuality which renders it difficult for
them to devote themselves to industrial pur
poses. Indeed, though the theory has been
that the original ownership of the land lies in
the Aboriginal tribes, and treaties are con
tinually made with them, yet the fact is that
the Government has always compelled the
removal of the Indians, when the necessities of
advancing settlements required them for the
use of the husbandman.
The entire system now pursued by the
Government toward the Indian, is wrong,
both to them and the white citizens. The
placing of the various tribes on reservations
scattered wide apart throughout our Western
States, is calculated only to increase the num
ber of well-paid officials, and to deteriorate,
debauch, and ultimately to exterminate by
drunkenness and disease, the tribes so located.
The policy of appointing tribal agents tends
only to enrich a large number of politicians
and hangers-on, whom the various Senators
and Representatives take this method of pen
sioning upon the national treasury in consid
eration of party or personal services. We
assert from an extended knowledge of the
class of men appointed to fill the various In
dian Agencies, Superintendencies, etc., that
considerations of fitness—such as knowledge
of the Indian character, a desire to benefit
them, acquaintance with agriculture or other
arts of civilization, are among the very last
things that seem to have entered the minds
of the appointing power. The Indian Bureau,
as at present managed, is necessarily but a
huge machine for enriching a lot of offi
cials, who desire to make the most of the four
years’ lease of power. The only other effect
of the existing agencies is to persistently de
stroy the confidence of the Indians in the
Government, to render our frontiers liable to
such scenes as have occurred in Minnesota
and upon the overland-routes, whenever the
HI
embarrassments of the nation or the despera
tion of the savages may afford an opportunity
or pretext, and to continually embitter the
pioneer population of the West against the
unfortunate red men.
The other and collateral portion of the
present policy, is the payment to Indian tribes
of large sums of money in the form of annui
ties—these payments being with the permit
ting of authorized traders among the different
tribes, who generally manage, with the pe
culiar faculty which belongs to all connected
with the Indians, to enrich themselves at the
expense of their customers. By arrangements
made with agents, the Indians are permitted
to run into debt at the stores, and when the
payments are made by the Government, but a
small portion of the annuities reach the pock
ets ofthose for whom they are intended. Ex
amination of the accounts of a trader to any
tribe will disclose how enormous are the
profits of the traffic, and how large a portion
thereof is for articles which are of no practi
cal benefit. Paint, beads, paltry and gaudy
articles of dress, constitute the largest items
in the bills incurred by the Indians at their
trading-posts. The fiction is that agents
have nothing to do with traders. The truth,
however, is that they obtain a large percent
age of these profits. It can be readily seen
how such temptations tend to illegitimate ar
rangements. On this subject we find the fol
lowing well-considered suggestions of Judge
Usher, in a late report. They deserve con
sideration and contain the germ of the true
Indian policy which should be pursued by the
National Government: “lam iully convinced
that many serious difficulties grow out of the
practice of permitting traders to sell goods
and other property to the Indians on credit.
The profits which are made by the traders,
might be used for the Indians. It seems to
me expedient for Congress to provide by law,
for the purchase of such goods, agricultural
implements, stock, and such other articles as
the Indians need, to be paid for from the
sums provided by treaties to be paid to the
Indians. These should be placed in charge
of a store-keeper under the control of the
agent, and should be delivered to the Indians
as their necessities may require, charging
them only the cost and transportation. All
contracts with them should be prohibited, and
all promises or obligations made by them be
declared void. A radical change in the mode
of treatment of the Indians, should, in my
�The Friend of Progress.
judgment, be adopted. Instead of being
treated as independent nations, they should
be regarded as wards of the Government, en
titled to its fostering care and protection.
Suitable districts of country should be assign
ed to them for their homes, and the Govern
ment should supply them, through its own
agents, with such articles as they use, until
they can be instructed to earn their subsist
ence by their labor.”
Mr. Usher has struck the key-note of the
whole question, in the expression that the
Indians should be regarded “as wards of the
Government, entitled to its fostering care and
protection.” The same principle has forced
itself upon our attention in the necessities at
tending the condition of the freed people of
the South. It grows out of the demands of
a Christian civilization which compels a re
cognition of the duty incumbent upon power,
wealth, culture, to protect the weak and lift
up the ignorant to higher planes of progress.
Neither the Negro or the Indian can develop
in isolation. Both are eminently gregarious,
though differing widely in the manifestations
thereof. Hence the futility of endeavoring to
save and elevate the Indians by the present
system, apart from just objections to it, found
ed on the opportunities for plunder on the
part of those connected with them. The
most feasible and practicable plan for the
protection and advancement of both Indians
and whites, seems to be found in the Territo
rial system hinted at by Secretary Usher,
more elaborately stated by Senator Pomeroy,
of Kansas, in a paper laid before the Indian
Bureau, and published in Mr. Commissioner
Dole’s report for 1862, which plan has been
broached to the loyal Indians of the Territory
west of Arkansas. This plan had reference
mainly to the semi-civilized tribes living on
reservations in the State of Kansas, and con
templated their removal to the Territory oc
cupied by the Cherokees, Choctaws, Creeks,
Chickasaws, and Seminóles. We propose to
elaborate this same plan and show its appli
cation to a settlement of the entire question
under discussion.
To do this properly, some statements should
be given as to the numbers, condition, pro
gress, locations of the Indian tribes within the
United States. From the preliminary report
of the Eighth Census, we copy the following
table of the Indian population, retaining their
tribal character and not enumerated in the
Census:
West of Arkansas,.. G5,680
California,............... 13,540
Georgia,....................... 377
Indiana,...................... 384
Kansas...................... 8,189
Michigan,................. 7,777
Minnesota............... 17,900
Mississippi,................ 900
New York,................ 3,785
North Carolina......... 1,499
I Oregon,..................... 7,000
Tennessee,................ 181
Wisconsin,................ 2,833
Colorado Ter.,......... 6,000
Dacotah Ter.,......... 39.664
Nebraska Ter.,......... 3,072
N evada Ter............... 7,550
New Mexico Ter., . .55,100
Utah Ter.,.............. 20,000
Washington Ter.,.. 31,000
I
i
I
I
294,431
Governor Evans, of Colorado, states in his
first Report to the Indian Bureau, that the
Utahs, Kiowas, and Comanches number
10,000, and range in the western part of that
Territory. Large bands of the Kiowas and
Comanches roam through portions of Colora
do, New Mexico, and the Indian Territory.
All of these tribes are wild and warlike.
Since the spring of 1864 they have been in
constant hostility. The long continued inter
ruption of the Overland Mail and Telegraph,
with robberies and murders committed upon
the frontier settlements of Kansas, Nebraska,
and Colorado, during the last ten months,
point conclusively to the necessity of com
ing to some permanent, just understanding
with these tribes, and all similar ones; or, if
that be not possible, then to a war so com
plete, thorough, and energetic as shall once
for all break down and destroy the warlike
marauds of the plains. We are also urged to
the adoption of a correct policy towards
tribes that have not yet made treaties, by the
rapid growth of our empire in the direction of
their haunts, and consequent necessity of
providing equitably for their wants. In addi
tion to those enumerated in the foregoing
table, tribes which bear relation to the Gen
eral Government of a more or less distinct
character, there are probably not less than
one hundred and fifty thousand belonging to
tribes which have not yet acknowledged our
rule while living within our Territory, and who
are more or less in hostility to our people.
We believe that we under- rather than over
estimate the number.
A glance at the map, and at the location
of the principal bodies of Indians, will readily
show that any territorial system which will
cover the whole case, must involve at least
the location of four districts, of suitable extent
and character to support the entire Indian
population within the territorial area of the
Union. The most prominent, because, from
the circumstances attending its past and
present history, the most accessible and suita
ble, is the region known as the Indian Terri
tory, bounded on the North by Kansas, South.
�delations of the Indians and the General Government.
279
by Texas, East by Arkansas and a small strip the Federal authority in Florida, Hal-us-tus■of South-West Missouri, and West by New tenug-gee, was the leader of his people in the
Mexico. It contains an area of 74,127 square battles they fought in common with Creeks
miles, or 47,441,480 acres, being in length and Cherokees, against their rebel brethren
east and west, 320, and breadth, North and in November and December, 1861, and since
South, 220 miles. It has a delightful climate as members of the Indian Brigade of the
in the same zone as Mississippi, Alabama, Army of the Frontier, under Major General
and the Carolinas, producing in abundance Blunt. Captain Billy Bowlegs is in command
the cereals of the temperate and the products of the Seminole company, in the Federal
of semi-tropical States, and having a virgin service. He is a nephew of the chief who
soil of inexhaustible fertility, it offers a tempt resisted so long in Florida. They number
ing field to the labor of the emigrant. The 2,226 persons. The Choctaws are disloyal,
eastern portion is well watered, and wooded being intensely pro-slavery. They numbered
by the Arkansas, Canadian, and Red River, 18,000, and owned 2,297 slaves. They are
and such streams as the Neosho, Grand, well educated, and supported, before the war,
Illinoise, Elk, Verdigris, Spring, and other the largest number of schools. The Chickaminor water-courses. The whole country is saws form part of the Choctaw Nation. They
admirably adapted to the raising of stock. number 5,000.
This is true of the western portion, the vast
The rebellion has materially changed this.
prairies of which will afford a congenial occu Slavery is dead among these tribes, and this
pation for the Indian, in the care of the herds removes one obstacle to an equitable re
and flocks which will one day cover the buf adjustment. They numbered 60,000 of the
falo range.
65,000 Indians living in this Territory. The
The fact of the settlement of the eastern negroes, slaves and free, 7,773, and the
portion of this territory by the well civilized whites 1,988. This, according to the census
tribes that now inhabit it, and the necessity of 1860. The mortality has been terrible
for new treaties with them, owing to the since. The casualties of war, and the rava
changes produced by the rebellion, points to ges of famine and disease, must have reduced
this territory as the mostiavorable district for them at least 20,000. The present population
may, therefore, be set down as about 55,000,
liberally carrying out a new policy.
The five principal tribes, Cherokees, Creeks. all told, including those in the Federal and
Choctaws, Chickaaaws, and Seminoles, were, Rebel service.
at the commencement of the war, among the
In this Territory we propose that the Gov
wealthiest communities in the continent. ernment shall offer homes to all of the semi
They were large farmers, slave-owners, and civilized tribes of Kansas, Southern Nebraska,
stock-raisers. The Cherokees were the own Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and
ers of 2,504 slaves. Their personal wealth perhaps Minnesota. The tribes who come
was very large. The war has changed the under the designation of civilized, will number
character of affairs and reduced them to pov about 30,000, and be possessed of considera
erty. The loyal Cherokees exhibit a com ble wealth and intelligence. The alternative
mendable spirit of adaptation to their new may be presented to the more advanced of
surroundings. They have abolished slavery, them, who yet preserve a distinctive charac
making colored natives of the Territory citi ter, of abandoning the tribal form, national
zens. disfranchised the rebels, and otherwise annuities, and taking their present reserva
legislated in that direction. They express tions in severality, and thereby becoming
themselves willing to make arrangements for citizens of the United States. Those who do
the settlement of other Indians in their midst. not choose to accept this, and are desirous
The Creeks are an important tribe. The of preserving their semi-national existence,
loyal members of this tribe, comprising a can be removed to the Indian Territory, and
large majority, have abolished slavery, accord located on new homes, where the necessary
citizenship to the negroes and whites in their steps should be taken to provide for them
midst, donate lands to the freed people, and until their industry returns support. Such a
on equitable terms cede to the Government Territory and population, wisely managed
lands for the settlement of their tribes.
and generously provided for, would in a very
The Seminoles are a small and intensely few years be a self-supporting community,
loyal people. One of the last chiefs to resist affording the nation the satisfaction of seeing
�280
The Friend of Progress.
the Aboriginal race preserved and made of
value to themselves as well as to the country.
Might we not well hope, if a wise policy was
pursued, to see it asking admission a few
years hence as a Free State into the Union?
In the meantime a delegate might be allowed
them in Congress. The Fosses, Christy,
Dowing, and other chiefs of the civilized In
dians, are able and educated men. Objections
may be urged to this plan, of expense in
removal, necessity of a large military force to
preserve order, and similar arguments. We
reply, that the economy in the Indian admin
istration here would in a short period more
than compensate for the expense incurred by
removal, provided that in all future arrange
ments, the system of trading, of paying annui
ties, and of tribal agents now in vogue, be
entirely abolished. Experience has proved
the capacity of these loyal Indians to act as
soldiers, and to defend their own homes and
interests. There are three regiments of
mounted infantry (Indians') in the United
States service jn that Territory. These In
dians can be intrusted with their own police.
They should, when practicable, be intrusted
with such duty, if only for the purpose of edu
cating them up to the full requirements of
citizenship. Thus much by way of suggestion
in relation to the Indian Territory.
For the tribes located and roaming in
Northern Nebraska, Idaho, Dakota, Minneso
ta, and the Lake Superior region, a Territory
should be organized in some portion of the
North-West. A portion of Dakota could be
wisely selected. It will not do to locate it
too near the mountains, as the continued gold
discoveries attract emigrants hitherward, and
will necessarily disturb the Indians. Such
a district must be chosen with a view to a cer
tain accessibility in supplying the military
force that will be required among them for
some years. It should be adapted to agri
cultural and grazing purposes, and be sup
plied with fuel and water.
Gen. Pope, when in command of the NorthWest, suggested the territory north and east
of the Upper Missouri, and west of the James
River. The country around Lake Mini Wakan,
and at the head of the Plateaus De Coteau,
Du Missouri, and Du Coteau Du Sioux, is an
admirable location, and his policy has been
to establish a chain of posts from the Red
River in Minnesota, to the Missouri, and up
to the confluence of the Yellowstone, and
gradually drive in the hostile Sioux, placing
a cordon around to retain them there. He
succeeded to a considerable extent, and if his
policy be pursued fully, it will work well.
With the wants of the Indians properly
supplied, and a judicious selection of officers
over them, this population, now the source of
uneasiness, may be made valuable and selfsustaining. In this relation it would be wise
to select agents from among educated half
breeds and missionaries, men whose identifi
cation with and knowledge of the race, will en
able them to deal understanding^ and justly.
There is now left to care for, the tribes
within the Pacific States and Territories, and
among the mining region of the Sierra Madre
or Rocky Mountains. For a large portion of
those in Colorado, suitable homes can be
found in the western portion of the Indian
Territory. For tribes to whom that country
might not be adapted, a portion of Utah
might be obtained. Here the mountain tribes
of Colorado, Utah, and Nevada might be
gathered and controlled. In New Mexico the
condition of the tribes at all tamable, the ex
istence of the Puebla Indians offers a success
ful result for the guidance of new experiments.
We have not the details of their life and pro
gress, though we know generally of their
industry and good order. To the devoted
priests of the Catholic church belongs the
honor of civilizing these people. They have
always been successful, and it would pay the
Government to support missionaries of that
faith among the red men of the west. There
are tribes in New Mexico and Arizona, who
seem determined to die in their independence,
rather than submit to civilization or the en
croachments of the w’hite man. Such are the.
Navajoes and Appaches. These must submit,
if not to peace, then to be crushed. The
present amazing gold discoveries in these
Territories demands this. Civilization needs
wealth to aid its forward march.
Gen. Carleton, commanding in New Mexico,
has succeeded in effectually subduing the
Navajoes. This is the first time for one hun
dred and fifty years, that anything like peace
has been brought about. He is now en
gaged and has been for twelve months past
engaged in removing them from their moun
tain homes to the valley of the Bosque Redonds, where it is intended to locate all but
the Pueblas. For the Appaches of Arizona,
who, during two hundred years, have deso
lated this region, nothing short of remorseless
warfare will succeed.
�Each Fights for AU.
Is it best for humanity that the inexhausti
ble treasure hived by the centuries, and held
safely locked in the primal granite of the
mother-mountains as a sacred trust for the
era enterprising enough to demand their
hitherto unproductive riches, should be
snatched from us by a sentimental reverence
for the hypothetical rights of a dog-in-themanger people who can neither use nor de
velop such wealth themselves, nor will allow
any other people to do so ? Is the nation that
wrung free commerce from the Japanese,
likely to allow the uncultured Indians to
throw barriers in the way of its advancing
march? The question is an important one.
The onward progress of benign civilization
should not be stayed, while justice and mag
nanimity should always take part in the deci
sions of a great nation.
Upon the Pacific coast there is the same
need of a just Indian policy. In California
there are fifteen thousand of this race, who
have neither lands nor homes. They have not
even the poor satisfaction of a paltry reserva
tion. The Spaniard never recognized the
Indian land-title, and we, succeeding to his
sovereignty, have succeeded to his policy.
Something must be done for the Californian
Indians. Would it not be practicable to ob
tain sufficient territory, say in Washington, to
mass the tribes of California, Oregon, and the
territory named, carrying out the same gen
eral policy suggested herein for the manage
ment of the proposed Indian territory ?
The plan here suggested is the result of
careful thought, observation, and desire to
deal rightly by the Indians and our own
people. We are not wedded to it as a hobby,
but rather suggest it as a measure of practical
and beneficent policy. The great end and
aim of all efforts in this nation for the amelio
ration and advancement of any portion of the
population placed as are the Indians or ne
groes, must be to clear the path, aiding them
to reach the utilities of an industrial and
Christian Democracy, that thereby they may
become worthy of being an integral portion
of that nationality which, aiming to establish
in Government the ideal justice, will yet
prove practically that all men are endowed by
their Creator with the right to life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness.
281
The sons of light in every age and zone,
Though on the cross, the gibbet, or the throne,
Now armed with love, the martyrs of a faith,
And now with steel, the anointed priests of
death,
Who shed the tyrant’s or their own best blood,
Stand rank to rank one serried brotherhood;
Moses who smote the Egyptian to the dust,
With him who died the Just for the unjust:
Deep-thoughted Plato with his mystic “ word,”
And fiery Cromwell armed with Gid eon’s sword,
Melancthon mild, with Luther roughly strong—
That storm-plowed crag with its lark’s nest
of song;
Fair tyrant-slayers, Jael and Corday,
With brave Grace Darling plucking ocean’s
prey
Out of his foaming jaws, and her, as brave,
That Nightingale whose music ’tis to save ;
AU free strong natures, beautiful and clear,
Who make earth better, and the heavens more
near,
Servants of God—the sacramental host
Who bear his banners down the invaded coast
Of flying darkness, form one dauntless corps,
To whom yon million worlds add countless
thousands more.
A thousand rivers swell the same free surge,
A hundred ways to one fair town converge,
An 4 rock, and tree, and treasures of the mine,
In one grand temple, one sweet home com
bine :
So meet all gifts in service of the One
Who rays them out as from a central sun.
He builds for all who builds by inward law,
For years unborn, and lands he never saw:
The smallest insect in the coral reef,
Unseen, unseeing, and of life so brief,
With pulpy arms too powerless to command
The ponderous motions of a grain of sand,
Weaving at once his vest and burial robe,
Lays the foundations of the solid globe ;
So true work grows and least at last is great,
And each serves All in one well-ordered state.
The sword Harmodius on the tyrant drew,
If justly drawn, struck well for me and you;
The song of Miriam, by the avenging sea,
Was sung for bondmen on the dark Santee ;
The people’s cry that crumbled the Bastile,
Was the old shout that made first darkness
reel.
When Spartan valor kept that narrow pass
Where Freedom fell with slain Leonidas,
Not Persia’s millions could subdue the braves,
Nor all the centuries trampling on their
graves:
They strike for Freedom in her every blow—
The soul is the most powerful of all poisons. Their deed sheds light on every dauntless
brow;
It is the most penetrating and diffusible stim Who dares to die to make a people free,
ulus.—Novalis.
Still guards unconquered his Thermopj las :
�282
The Friend of Progress.
Hope of the nations—heir of pure renown,
Though named Leonidas or Old John Brown !
A gallant spirit never breathed our air.
But left some touch of nobler being there ;
No heart of pity soothed a brother’s pain,
But sent some pulse to life’s remotest vein:
A soul of truth becomes a Name of power—
The saving watchword of a crisis’ hour:
Around great natures, with no trumpet-call,
The peoples rally, proud to fight and fall.
They choose their lords as doth the lioness,
Who wins the battle, wins their love’s caress.
What though, as round their rival chiefs they
crowd,
A hundred war-cries shake their streamers
proud,
Till all that clamor to pained ears might seem
The wild disorder of a frenzied dream ;
Ore spirit rears each burning Gonfalon,
And men are clanships because Man is one !
[From “Answers to Questions.”]
Psycliometrical Examination of
Abraham Lincoln.
BY
A. J.
DAVIS.
By particular request, a friend in Wash
ington furnished the President’s autograph
and a scrap of his hand-writing. By this
method a connection with the characteristics
of Mr. Lincoln was perfected, and the results
of the examination are herewith respectfully
submitted. I have no personal knowledge of
the mental peculiarities of the President.
What is here given, therefore, must stand or
fall, according to the facts in possession of
those who know him best. I shall welcome
the verdict of his most intimate friends; more
especially do I wait for proofs to be furnished
by him as President of the United States.
[The following was written soon after Mr.
Lincoln entered upon the duties of his office
in 1861.]
IMPRESSIONS ON VIEWING HIM OBJECTIVELY.
His physical system is muscularly, but not
vitally, powerful. It is unevenly developed
in the joints and sockets. He is not nervous,
elastic, or sensitive; and yet, with respect to
bodily endurance, he is remarkably easy,
steady, and unyielding. With care he can
resist the approach of disease in any form ex
cept in the loins and throat. His internal
organs are not large, but their functions are
steadily and fully performed. He is built to
sustain a prodigious quantity of either manual
or mental labor; but such labor, to be well
done, must be very carefully graduated by an
orderly division of days and hours. He must
not be hurried and urged beyond his natural
deliberateness. He is rapid only when under ;
the action of his own temperaments. All j
outward stimuli, in the shape of air, and
foods, and drinks, exert but little effect.
j
. In conversation, or when addressing a mul
titude, the same seli-steadiness is exhibited.
There is no dissimulation in his manners; no
attempt to stand straighter, to look hand
somer, to speak more eloquently, or to act
more gracefully, than when alone with a
friend or in the retirement of his family. He
is not impetuous in physical gesture, but em
phatic and strong, with an irregularity which
is almost eccentric and quite original.
He appears like a man not fond of parlor
life. Temporal comforts do not tempt him
from the rugged paths of duty. His features
are indicative of honor, sincerity, simplicity,
generosity, and good nature, with much of
the indomitable and unchangeable.
IMPRESSIONS ON VIEWING HIM SOCIALLY.
His domestic affections are temperate and
unwavering, but not powerful, and yet, at
home with his family, there is no man more
happy and contented. Children are interest
ing to him when they are playful. But his
tongue is the quickest to interest the young.
He appreciates the young mind, is attracted
by its simplicities, and is ever ready to hear or
relate a story. But this man is not over-much
wedded to locality. He is not a traveler by
nature, and yet a change of place is rather a
relief to, than a tax upon his feelings.
His private life is remarkable for artless
ness and uniform truthfulness. Warm and
confiding to his friends, and never embittered
toward his enemies, he smooths the path of
many in his vicinity. He is fond of praise,
but is likely to remain firm in friendship, un
der the lash of private disapprobation. He
is not hasty to demolish his opponent, even
when he has been sorely aggrieved by him,
but rather inclines to give his enemy another
conscious opportunity for reflection.
IMPRESSIONS ON VIEWING HIM INTELLECTUALLY.
There is a singular texture of brain for his
mind to act through. It is elastic only after
repeated exertions to bring it into action.
Then his intellectual organs act separately,
so to say, or one at a time—each, like an inde
pendent entity, doing its duty singly, and with
out consulting the feelings or inclinations of
its fellow-laborers. His understanding of a
matter is at first unsatisfactory to himself.
The facts, and fragments, and data of an
event or case first occupy all the spare rooms
in the department of bis intelligence. Things,
and persons, and places, and the acts of
agents in relation to them, cluster in chaotic
groups before his perceptions. He is, there
fore, not certain, at first, whether he sees
things in their proper places, and whether he
appreciates the full import and force of a
single fact; but, guided by a wholesome and
powerful love of accuracy, he persists in ob
serving, and arranging, and recombining the
items of a matter, untd, with an approbation
wholly internal, he fixes his opinions and
proceeds therefrom to act.
There is a critical and studied adhesion to
established rules of thought and reasoning.
He dreads an unauthorized digression from
the recognized powers in either law, politics,
�Psychometrical Examination of Abraham Lincoln.
or religion. And yet he pays deferential
respect to the deductions of no one mind in
any department of human interest. His per
ceptive powers are active, and readily dis
cover the errors and tricks of men, and are
equally quick to detect a ridiculous flaw in
an argument, or the most assailable point in
a general proposition. He will rely on his
own judgment, and is unwavering in attach
ment to his own conclusions.
There is nothing impetuous in the delibera
tions of such a mind. The lightning flash of !
genius, though it might reveal to his eyes the
inlinite unity of the universe, would not move
him. The range of real principles he must
infer from the position, magnitude, multipli
city, and force otfacts. He cannot penetrate
the surface by intuition, but must enter in at
the open door of events and data. Shelley’s
poetry could interest his mind rarely, but be
would glean much poetry from the sermons of
Dr. Channing. History would give much rest
to his intellect; but science, if it should smell of
mountains, and forests, and grand objects in
space, as geology and astronomy, would yield
the largest gratification. And yet this man’s
mind is never satisfied unless its deductions
are consistent with the major elements of hu
man nature.
IMPRESSIONS ON VIEWING HIM MORALLY.
By this I mean spiritually, or with reference
to the most interior and religious attributes
of his being. He is a man of talent and indus
try, but no genius, no man for the moment,
no ability to decide in advance of reflection
and analysis. The man of intuition is impoli
tic and revolutionary. Mr. Lincoln is no such
man. He is willing to accept a great responsi
bility, to act well his whole duty, and to leave
things as he found them. A new State and
the foundations of new Laws are the electrical
eliminations of genius. Strong minds are
certain to elaborate and administer the inspi
rations of genius, but such minds cannot elec
trify a country with the enunciation of any
very revolutionary law. No new truth ever
bubbles over the bowl of their lives. Mental
powers are unfertile, unless fed and fostered
by the endless fires of truth and justice.
Morally speaking, Mr. Lincoln is what the
religious world would call a “naturally good
man.” Whether sanctified by faith or not,
his “works” are distinguished by an ex
tremely sensitive regard to everybody’s rights
and everybody’s greatest welfare. Justice,
when tempered with a gentle paternal mercy,
is dear to him. He is, however, more benevo
lent than conservative, and more humanely
sympathetic than conscientious, and is there
fore liable to err and come short .under the
pressure of appeals from the unfortunate. In
all matters intrusted to his care and control,
he is self-sacrificing and faithful to the end,
with very much' beautiful self-forgetfulness
and straightforward integrity.
But there is a remarkable trait in this man’s
spirit, not often found among professed poli
ticians, and that is, a willingness to concede
that he does not know what will occur to
283
morrow. For this reason he is teachable, and
is most anxious to gain knowledge from
almost every imaginable source. How earn
estly and sincerely, how calmly and faithfully,
does Mr. Lincoln give audience, even to the
discourse of the least of his associates! The
modesty of his manner is an earnest of his
moral excellence. He cannot be certain that
his knowledge is up to the measure of to
morrow’s consequences; wherefore he, unlike
the conceited pettifogger and political mountebank, is open to more light and instruction.
I think he would be much rejoiced to learn
of the departed concerning the eternal to
morrow.
But shall we not also mention that this
man is a close-mouth ed-keeper of “ his own
counsels” ?* This trait is observable, even to
his most intimate friends, with whom he is
ever confiding. Whenever there is the least
obscurity, he hesitates, checks his impulses,
and looks steadily toward consequences. The
doctrine of Retribution, so far as be is indi
vidually concerned, would seem to have no
weight. He is above personal fear, and does
not court public favor or position: but the
question whether the results of a given course
will subserve the interests of mankind, is very
deliberately revolved by his moral faculties.
Cajoling demagogues cannot captivate this
man’s moral forces. He is silent, but firm,
amid cotton-lords and slave-dealing monopo
lies. He is fond of progressive civilization,
amid the strongholds of conservatism and
aristocracy, and'the God of his heart is for
lawful freedom and unitary strength. He
appreciates the loathsomeness of treason,
sees its deadly blight as it steals over the
minds of once faithful men, and yet enter
tains glorious hopes and undimmed faith in
the direction of freedom and peace.
IMPRESSIONS
ON VIEWING HIM INDIVIDUALLY.
Under this head I propose to give the sum
of Mr. Lincoln’s character in its relation to
the world. He is cordial, loves to entertain
friends, but is not fastidious in the matter of
selection; and is a devoted friend and brother
to all. But, intellectually and morally, he is
too cautious and too fearful of doing wrong,
to be party to any very original or revolu
tionary scheme. He will step slowly, and
firmly, and independently; but, in the mean
time, many things will come to light, and
events will transpire which will compel a
modification of procedure. Of enemies, Mr.
Lincoln will have but few. Of friends, among
all parties, as long as he lives, there will be a
great multitude. He is a true American citi
zen, and believes not in leading public senti
ment, but following it, guided only by the
Constitution and thelaws'of Congress.
While, he. listens deferentially to those
about him, including the constituents of his
Cabinet, he is not the man to be carried be
yond his own judgment. He will surely act
according to the orders of his individual reason
and will. It is folly to suppose that any diplo
matist or influential legislator can succeed
long in warping the judgment of this con
scientious man.
•
�284
The Triend of Progress.
Mr. Lincoln is a very prudential character,
and would not transcend the letter of the
law. Its letter and its spirit are inseparable
in his eyes. He is preeminently a man of
“peace,” and would not object to a “compro
mise,” if the people so declared their wishes;
but from him the world may never expect
such a proposition to emanate. There is,
however, some danger to be apprehended from
the exceedingly sympathetic, cautious, legal,
and economical suggestions of his peculiar
mental structure. The poet has very nearly
defined his conception of what should consti
tute the foundations and glory of our Govern
ment:
“----- Men, high-minded men,
With powers as far above the brutes endued,
In forest, brake, or den,
As beasts excel cold rocks and brambles rude—
Men who their duties know,
But know their rights, and knowing, dare main
tain,
Prevent the long aimed blow,
And crush the tyrant while they rend the
chain:
These constitute a State;
And sovereign Law, that State’s collected will,
O’er thrones and globes elate
Sits empress, crowning good, repressing ill.”
Let the country take counsel of its hopes,
and despair not, for there is a divinity, behind
the presidential mind, which will direct
heaven’s high purposes, and bring a better
day out of this black and awful night. Mr.
Lincoln will betray no trust, neither will he
shrink from still more pressing responsibili
ties; and the people would do well to share
the burthen of sympathy and care with which
he is oppressed.
BY PHCEBE CARY.
Alas, alas! how many sighs
Are breathed for his sad fate, who dies
With triumph dawning on his eyes.
Who sees amid their ranks go down,
Great men, that never won renown,
And martyrs, with no martyr’s crown ?
Unrecognized, a poet slips
Into death’s total, long eclipse,
With breaking heart, and wordless lips ;
And never any brother true,
Utters the praise that was his due—
“ This man was greater than ye knew!”
No maiden by his grave appears,*
Crying out in long after years,
“I would have loved him,” through her tears.
We weep for her, untimely dead,
Who should have pressed the marriage-bed—
Yet to death’s chamber went instead.
But who deplores the sadder fate
Of her who finds no mortal mate,
And lives and dies most desolate ?
Alas ! ’tis sorrowful to know
That she who finds least love below,
Finds least of pity for her woe.
Hard is her fate who feels life past,
Though loving hands still hold her fast,
And loving eyes watch to the last.
But she, whose lids no kisses prest,
Who crossed her own hands on her breast,
And went to her eternal rest;
She had so sad a lot below,
That her unutterable woe
Only the pitying God can know !
When little hands have dropped away
From the warm bosom where they lay,,
And the poor mother holds but clay :
What human lip that does not moan,
What heart that does not inly groan,
And make such suffering its own ?
Yet, sitting mute in their despair,
With their unnoticed griefs to bear,,
Are childless women everywhere ;
What thousands for the soldier weep,
From his first battle gone to sleep
That slumber which is true and deep.
Who never knew, nor understood,
That which is woman’s greatest good,
The sacredness of motherhood !
But who about his fate can tell,
Who struggled manfully and well;
Yet fainted on the march, and fell ?
But putting down their hopes and fears,.
Claiming no pity and no tears,
They live the measure of their years.
Or who above his rest makes moan,
Who dies in the sick tent alone—
“ Only a private, name unknown !”
They see age stealing on apace,
And put the gray hairs from their face,
No children’s fingers shall displace !
What tears down pity’s cheek have run
For poets singing in the sun,
Stopped suddenly, their song half done.
Though grief hath many a form and show,
I think that unloved women know
The very bottom of life’s woe !
But for the hosts of souls below,
Who to eternal silence go,
Hiding ttupr great unspoken woe :
And that the God, who pitying sees,
Hath yet a recompense for these,
Kept in the long eternities!
�The Inner Temple.
The Inner Temple.
BY
ESTELLE.
I have somewhere read, long ago, of a
heathen devotee, who had constructed, in a
corner of the temple where devotions were
Offered to the gods, a chamber, which was
kept sacred to his own use; no profaning foot
was allowed to enter there, no irreverent or
carious eye must gaze therein, lest some bab
bling lip may whisper the secrets of the con
secrated chamber—the Inner Temple belonged
wholly to himself and the gods he worshiped.
Deep in the corner of every human heart,
far hidden from every eye, is an Inner Temple,
consecrated to the uses of the individual
alone.
We all meet upon a visible plane—we live
our outward life of rejoicing, of sorrow, of
prosperity, of want—we call this one covetous,
that one a profligate, here is a moral hero,
there a bigot. They pass us on the street,
and sit at our table, labeled with the verdict
of their fellow men: avaricious, sycophantic,
generous, amiable. We stamp them compla
cently, and there is no appeal from our deci
sion. Human nature, we say, is as an open
book, that he who will may read.
We call ourselves students of human nature.
We penetrate the weaknesses of our fellow
mortal, and when we have discovered a great
flaw or weakness in his character, we rub our
hands with complacent, self-paid compliments for our own cleverness.
Atas for the student of human nature!
When we have read and combined all the fin
ger-boards of a man’s character, which Nature
has placed upon each of her children—when
opposing elements have been carefully bal
anced, predominant passions brought for
ward, all points summed up into an infallible
whole, what have we gained ? The vestibule
to the Inner Temple only—the door of the
secret chamber is closed, and the key is not
in our possession. We act our various roles
in life behind a mask, not bceause of will,
but of necessity.
Once in a life-time some one is found to
whom this Holy of Holies is revealed.
What bliss to wander hand in hand with
this kindred spirit, down the rough valleys,
and up the sunny slopes of this life, to lay
down the burden of mortality together, and
mingle in the glories of immortality, one
mind and one soul.
285
But though this inner life is, and must of
necessity be a sealed chapter to us, I often
amuse myself by speculating upon its nature,
as developed by outer indications.
I once saw a poor woman returning after a
day of hard labor to her miserable hovel,
stooping to pick a stunted, faded blossom, on
which the summer dust had gathered thickly,
and it pleased me to imagine that in the Inner
Temple rare flowers bloomed, and sweet birds
sang, and music and fragrance shed their soft
ening influence over her life of squalor, pov
erty, and wretchedness.
I have seen a friend sit at her piano when
twilight shadows were gathering in the room,
and let her fingers wander over the keys in a
sort of dreamy trance, wakening harmonies
that were never practiced under the eye of a
teacher, or learned from books; and I knew,
if she did not, that she was playing for the
spirit that dwelt in the Inner Temple.
Best gift of Nature when its outward mani
festations are harmony, charity^ kindness,
and love. How terrible when it becomes the
abode of demoniac passions—a secret cham
ber full of unclean images, where the imagi
nation delights to wander, groveling in gross
ness and sensuality of spirit, while the avenues
are kept pharisaically clean and pure for the
eyes of the world.
“ If I keep my thoughts to myself they can
do no harm, ” says the spiritual debauchee. A
little longer, and the screen of mortality is
laid aside, and he can behold the blackness of
ashes where the vestal flame should be burn
ing—the walls defaced with hideous images, a
temple where none but evil passions could
delight to dwell—images, which it will take
years of progress to erase. Every offense
against purity leaves a scar upon the soul.
Alas for those to whom the Inner Temple
is but the tomb of a dead or crucified love,
waiting the touch of the shining finger ef the
Angel of Death to roll the stone from the
mouth of the sepulcher, that this love may
rise transfigured and glorified, with wings
poised for the spheres of immortality.
“Your unvarying cheerfulness is unac
countable to me, ” said a friend to me one day.,
“ If I did not know you better I should say yon
were too frivolous to realize misfortune.”
“I dwell in my Inner Temple,” was the nnspoken reply, saddened by the thought that
this faithful friend of years, whose hand had
clasped ours in love a thousand times, knew
so little of that bright realm where fragrance,
�■286
The Friend of Progress.
and sunshine, and music, and all things beau
tiful, reign perpetually, and cast their shi
ning halo over the adversities of common
life—a splendor that turns its common dross
to precious gold.
Alas for those who sit together at the
hearth with clasped hands on winter nights,
and in the wailing wind without can hear no
undertone of harmony—who sit day after day
at the same table, who lie down at night, and
rise in the morning together, who walk side
by side through life, and ever strive vainly to
pierce the vail that separates their souls, gro
ping with baffled fingers for the entrance
to that spiritual chamber where where each
holds converse with his own imaginings.
Guard well the Inner Temple. Cleanse it
from envy, from impurity, from uncharitable
ness—so shall you be more prepared to enter
into that life where suffering is not, and sor
row cannot come.
sighted friends are not the most agreeable
persons to have relations with. To them the
object they are after, the evil to be remedied,
the patch of color or limb just before their
eyes, is the one only noble purpose of life.
All who do not run in their grooves are sav
agely denounced; all who, looking beyond, see
the soft landscape stretching away into a
beautiful perspective; all who see how the
Divine Artist has rounded out the statue of
life into complete and perfect proportions,
and therefore cannot give more attention than
properly due, to the apparent imperfection
of detail; these are denounced and derided
as wanting earnestness, and as unworthy
workers.
Let us not eschew earnestness. Let us be
zealous, but at the same time tone our judg
ments by that divine charity which recognizes
the finiteness of man, the imperfection of his
surroundings, and the controlling power of
circumstance. Fight we the evil with the
spirit of the Crusaders, but let it be the evil,
and not so much the individual doers thereof,
who, after all, are likewise its victims. H.
A Single String.
Some one says: “ The more music you can
make on one string the less it will cost you
to keep your fiddle strung.” The advice is
poor economy unless toe instrument be played
by a master hand. It takes a Paganini to
make harmony from a single string. The
richest lives are not found among the one-idea
men. When, however, the subtile keys of
melody or thought have been touched,
genuis can create from its single truth or
chord, that world of weird’suggestions and
correspondence, from which the rhythmical
harmonies are evolved. A single great idea.,
like the central chord in music, is a key by
which the possessor unravels the spiritual
universe, and enters into all mysteries.
Yet, let none believe that either life or mu
sic can be perfect upon the one-string theory.
Development is the distinctive mark of this
era. Harmony is the hope of the age. How
do we see men whose devotion to one thought,
one purpose,—whose resistance to one evil,
has completely obscured their vision in all
other directions. These are the genuine
fanatics; persons who get so near the object
aimed at, that they cannot see its relations to
the other parts of the universal whole. I have
seen a near-sighted man looking at a picture or
statue. Forced by his infirmity to get near the
object, it was utterly impossible for him to see
beyond that portion upon which his eyes rested.
Tiie tout ensemble is invisible to him, or only to
be absorbed by slow and painful efforts. Is not
this an example of the rigid, unbending pu
rist, the possessed one-ideaist. The near
sighted men, either in physical or mental life,
acquire a microscopic minuteness and accu
racy which in some degree makes up for their
deficiency of breadth and comprehensiveness
of vision. But in mental activities our near
BY LOUISE PALMER,
Her letter lies under my pillow—its words
burn heart and brain ;
Ten days ago their warming changed to the
smarting fire of pain:
“My lover dear,” she says, “Of strong men
prince and flower,
I hold my soul in patience up, and watch and
wait the hour
When past all shouting in the street to my list
ening ear shall come
The eager tread oi your manly feet in the
regiment marching home.
0 happiest girl in the warring land to reach
the day at length
When my hero’s arms shall shut me close in
the safety of their strength.”
Bitterest words to me who lie in the hospital
ward alone,
With a crippling wound in my leg, and my arm
forever gone!
She fills her heart with her lover’s praise in
dreams that never tire,
Nor knows he lies a shattered wreck—past
any heart’s desire.
Her own will fail when she comes to see—I
have no fear for her truth;
She will turn her pride to protection—her love
to sorrowing ruth.
For that you know, is a woman—forever patient
and true
In sacrifice to your need of her, while she needs
nothing of you:
That brings the question quick to heart with
subtlest rankle and sting,
What have I to give for her perfect youthmost sweet and precious thing 1
�Relinquish eel.
What but the burden of my loss to clog her
lightsome years—
My weakness where God meant support—a
cloud of cares and tears.
Yet every pulse of my broken life tremulous
yearns and stirs
To bind its pitiful weakness up with the joyous
strength of hers!
In passionate prime when I held you close in
the grace of a first caress,
And called you my Lizzie, my own for life, I
loved and wanted you less
Than now, as I lie all nerveless, spent, and wan
with the pallor of pain,
And no right arm to draw you close to my
longing heart again.
287
I To thick of the added care oi a wife, and beg
your kindly release.”
Such speech as this will kindle her pride and
the fire of her quick disdain
Will snap the bond her pity would bind like the
links of a daisy-chain.
The letter is ended and sped, and I think of it
day by day;
On its journey home, where I thought to be
taking my eager way,
Till it reaches the hand whose tender touch I
was hoping now to feel.
I think of her face as its impatient eyes the
letter’s sense reveal!
As quick along the rambling lines her kindling
glances scan,
I know I can hobble home on my crutch, and
She will not guess my heart’s best blood along
claim my promised wife—
the letters ran.
Creep into the arms of her pity and shelter
me there for life.
0 sweet and strong temptation! 0 precious I did not know that mortal days could float a
man so slow;
rest to win!
God help me rally what manhood’s left against Once cast aloose from love and hope on their
dull tide to flow!
the lovely sin!
Lord save me from the selfish deed of taking I feel the longing lack of her loss in every
leaden hour:
her life for mine ;
Let me give her freedom, the one good gift Yet keep like a fool her image at heart in its
place of ancient power.
left to my love divine.
I shall see not even her writing again on aught
Greater is he who conquers his soul, is the
—not the tiniest note,
praise of the holy page,
Save cold address on letters returned, that my
Than one that taketh the city strong in face of
lost right hand wrote.
the enemy’s rage.
Yet my pulse leaps up when the mail comes in,
I braced my spirit with half the strain for the
refusing to feel how vain
shock of bloody fray
The hope of precious missive sent from her
That it takes to scale the cruel hights of sac
firm white hand again.
rifice to day!
But at last my bitter strife prevails,- and my As I lie in silence alone, and close my eyes to
heart’s desire lies slain:
night,
Now the letter quick, lest the foe revive and I let the thought of her grow and fill my inward
make my victory vain.
sight,
Till I almost feel her smile the shadowy ward
Only the ink and paper, nurse—I will not tax
illume,
your hand:
And hear the float of her dress, and breathe its
My poor one left must begin to learn in place
vague perfume.
of the right to stand.
Why, my heart is as loth to coin the words as Kind Savior! whose tear is this that has fallen
my awkward hand to write !
on my face ?
Yet cold and hard I put them down, to lie at Whose these two hands that hold my one in
last in her sight.
clinging soft embrace ?
I know her too well to write the truth, to sound Whose voice can speak to me such words—too
her its wailing strain
sweet for truth their sounds ;
Of, “ My darling, I shut your sun from my life “My own ! do we love the dear Christ less for
and sit in the night of pain !
the mangling of his wounds 1”
The stalwart knight of your maiden choice went
down in battle’s rack,
Lizzie! my soul leaps out to light at the dayFailing forever out of the world—so take your
dawn of your eyes,
plighting back;
That I could not blind to my yearning love by
Nor cheat your heart a crippled wretch can for
any cold disguise.
its loss atone,
And waste upon his ailing life the sweetness of 0 quick to follow the shining steps of tbe
your own.”
Lord of woman born,
No words like these : but coldest talk of “cir Who came from the hights of Paradise to wed
cumstance, if foreseen
the church forlorn,
On the summer-day we made our troth, the And gave for it his priceless life in offering glad
vowing had never been.
and free,
The late battle disabled me somewhat, and on So out of the depths of her holy love she gives
the whole, I must cease
I
herself to me.
�288
The Friend of Progress.
Our Librarj/.
The Ideal Attained: Being the Story of Two
Steadfast Souls, and how they won their
Happiness and lost it not. By Eliza W.
Farnham. 1 volume. New York: 0. M.
Plumb & Co.
We give the title of Mrs. Farnham’s , volume
in full, because the first part of it conveys no
idea of its purport. It is a story of a man
and a woman, constructed after the author
ess’s ideal, who met on a sailing-vessel bound
for San Francisco; she on her way to an
uncle there; he yielding to an attraction
which had sprung up in his heart for her.
Other characters take part in the develop
ment of the story; but they serve merely as
foils to display these two. The incidents of
the plot are also arranged evidently with a
view of exhibiting these two personages in
the greatest variety of attitudes, both as indi
viduals and as related to each other. They
are brought intimately together—they are
kept sternly apart. They share in comforts and
in privations. They are subjected to rest and
to labor. They are tried by dependence and
by independence. They are alienated and
reconciled. Their minds meet on trivial sub
jects and on grave. The test of experience
brings out their weak and their strong points.
In the end, they are joined in a perfect union.
We infer from the Publishers’ Preface, that
this book was written a considerable time be
fore the last work, “Woman and her Era.”
Mrs. Farnham must, however, have had the
doctrine of that work matured in her mind
before she planned this. The two books are
complements of each other. “The Ideal
Attained ” is the illustration in the form of
experience of the theory maintained in “Wo
man and her Era.” It is the concrete of that
abstraction; or rather that gives the philoso
phy of the characters and relations depicted
in this. No reader of Mrs. Farnham’s last
book should fail to read the story before us;
and the reader of the story would do well to
turn over the chapters of that more elaborate
work. To many Mrs. Farnham’s theory of the
relation existing between man and woman,
and of their providential attitude in history,
seemed repulsive, owing, perhaps, to the ne
cessarily critical, analytical, and to some ex
tent, controversial character of the volumes in
which that theory was explained. But in this
vivid sketch of two lives, the relation between
the man and the woman is as natural and
sympathetic as one could wish. If Mrs.
Bromfield is a woman after Mrs. Farnham’s
own heart, and ‘ ‘ the Colonel ” is such a man
as her soul delights in, and their union the
legitimate and fair result of her premises, then
we say “ amen ” to her philosophy. For Mrs,
Bromfield is a woman who would adorn
the choicest circle—whom women would
admire—whom men would honor, accept,
and be only too glad to take to their
homes as wife, in the noblest sense of the
word. “The Colonel” is a man of a rare
stamp, whom women might be pardoned for
adoring, and whom men would applaud as a
model of manly virtues; and their union
comes as near what all good and cultivated
people would call a perfect marriage as this
earth gives an opportunity of seeing. The
characters are certainly idealized.
They
could hardly have been life-studies. If they
were, we envy the authoress her experience
in men and women. They are constructed,
we fancy—creations of her mind; but the
traits which her imagination supplies, be
long, without exception, to the pure manly
and womanly, and fill out, instead of distort
ing, the image of ordinary humanity.
The book is intensely earnest in its tone.
There is no trifling in its chapters. The
dramatis personae all have brains, and well do
they use them in discourse on grave themes.
Even the table-talk is significant. The
“asides” are momentous. We do not get
these people to the end of their voyage without
sailing over many seas of thought and sound
ing many deeps of reflection. To most people,
the reading of the book would be an educa
tion in liberal opinions, and a very pleasant
education too—for the course, though rigidly
exact, is so delicately conducted and so bril
liantly illustrated, that one is instructed while
seeming to be merely amused.
The literary execution of the volume
has much merit. The description of the
sea-voyage is full of alternate calm and
breeze. The life on the island might have
been painted from actual sketches taken on
the spot. The life in the young San Francisco
was, in truth, so painted, and we should not
know where, out of these pages, to find
another so faithful photograph of the woman
less, childless, chaotic, sandy town, as it was
in its early days. We feel as if we had been
there, and were glad we had got out of it.
“The Ideal Attained” will add greatly to
Mrs. Farnham’s literary reputation, as a suc
cessful attempt at the philosophical fiction:
the novel that holds an earnest, moral, social,
and even humane purpose, without losing the
fascinating excitements of the novel; the trea
tise on high themes of personal interest,
clothed in the rich garments of the novel, and
yet retaining the dignity of the treatise. The
story is good as a story; the moral is good as
a moral, and both moral and story are one.
We rather object to long letters at the
end of a tale. They look as if the author,
tired of his task, laid by his art, and supplied
the deficiency of his work by opening his files
of correspondence; and Mrs. Farnham’s epis
tolary style is not as graceful as her narra
tive: but the letters cannot be omitted by
the reader who wishes to understand the
story of the two lives, and the substance of them
will amply compensate for the form.
* *
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Friend of Progress. Vol. 1. No. 9, July 1865
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway, Moncure Daniel [1832-1907.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [New York]
Collation: [257]-288 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes bibliographical references. Printed in double columns. _Louise Palmer -- a review of 'The Ideal Attained' by Eliza W. Farnham. The spiritualist and occult journal was previously named Herald of Progress and then Banner of Light before becoming Friend of Progress which became more explicitly devoted to reform.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1865
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5295
Subject
The topic of the resource
Periodicals
Women's rights
Indigenous peoples
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Friend of Progress. Vol. 1. No. 9, July 1865), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Women
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/59ccdfb11019e8c8dde6b0cc69bdc38e.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=o1uHTZDBM4TROj-6xOlNrl4NRAzhZXdyUnQGZ4XG4qRS%7EctxW3jtauwXxYhWCunnFlc3WzvfUX9dnJ2ncAnmT-121Squ%7EFVHhEqUKGm-gMVroMTU5uD3UYYj4Xz%7E5e2PKhn5b95LOSsmaCwqaH4WJOziGcNqomJLfpZQJbszSdh8Ym9ysrtryi5CQ76O8xMm787IwR8v0Oze7YvNBj6t0VAff2eZczprdJOLNIqgM%7ED-ZVclAdWtAlG6odtDwla1wxuiNsrhUbLpt%7ERJka1-ondStIozFWI9XvsVDdGXQ-wqZ4qt1JdZD8ikMXjGkPsZ8w08KC-yL4iF%7EMlHyNwOsg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ff8a686b7730c6edf13068430281026c
PDF Text
Text
K 237^
nJ
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
4
(S. -“3 aXA-x^vx,
essa;y i.
Jod. Thou breathest to
Thou who art life itself.’
us the breath of life,
hi. IV. II
The student who has patiently followed these essays thus
far through the labyrinth of cumbrous dissertations is now
to lift his head from the darkness which abides under the
skirt of Wisdom, and from groping after Her secret trea
sures of This Place nro mpn m, to behold for a season
the light of Her countenance without: to the end that from
that which is above he may understand that which is below,
and from that which is below may seek that which is above:
and so learning to live for Her by whom and for whom all
worlds exist may strive and fight for Her, not as one that
beateth the air.
We are now to breathe a new atmosphere, the daylight
of the outer and upper sky where it gleams abroad on the
busy world, on the vast mart of individual and social
interests. The shadowy cloister of philosophy must soon
throw open its doors, and our disputants Ish and Adam
walk forth together into the high road and join the motley
throng of human beings as they are, in order to see and
hear what now is, and to judge what shall be hereafter.
They must carry with them no prejudices, not even such as
seemingly tend to the social elevation of woman ; for flat
tery is hardly less detrimental to that cause than deprecia
tion. Preceding arguments have more than once been
directed to point out the all-important philosophic distinc
tion between woman and women; and we must not mix up
the eternal Divinity of the former with the manifold and
multiform failings and imperfections of the latter. Our
task is to teach what women are born to be, and to show
that the education and consequent habits of the world
hitherto have directly tended to bring girls up to woman
hood in complete and exact reversal of that course of
development which belongs to their innate qualities and
�2
THE EDUCATION OE GIBUS.
powers; the consequence of which perversion—that is, thcfirst consequence ; for a ghastly and almost endless train
attaches to it—is the undeniable, though perhaps not
obvious, fact, that no one has ever yet seen a real grown-up
woman, and no one knows what such a woman woidd be
capable of.
This may seem a paradox, but it is really an axiom. No'
existing woman nor man would have become what she or
he is at this moment but for her or his social surroundings,
past and present. We are each and all what our social
circumstances and the use we have put them to have made
us ; and the vast differences, especially mental differences,
which we observe among members of the same sex are,
generally speaking, quite as much, if not more, induced
from without than arising from within; no idiosyncracy
being strong enough to stand quite alone in all matters
whatever against the current of the time.
Well, then, who can point to a time and a place in the
world’s history where the current of social life, the influenceof the social atmosphere, flowed in the direction of treating
woman as the spiritual superior, or even equal, of man ?
Where and when has this been done, I ask—done soearnestly and effectually that adverse influences from with
out could never penetrate and vitiate that hallowed sphere ;
When and where did any woman, during her growth to
womanhood, ever breathe a social atmosphere the main,
weight of which was not dead against female supremacy in
either world ? But if such a state of things can nowhere
be pointed at, we come back perforce to this conclusion: a
real grown-up woman has not yet appeared in this icorld.
And even this is not all; the question follows, whether man
can be fully human while woman is not. In the subsequent
pages it will be considered whether he can. Meanwhile
here is on exposition of her views on the great social
question, written by a lady to the Examiner periodical of'
May 20th, 1871, showing how some few of our women, even
*
as they are, can rise equal to occasion.
WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
Sir,—At the various meetings and conferences that have
been held, and in the lectures that have been delivered, during
the last few weeks on the Woman Suffrage question, an enor
mous amount of reason and argument in favour of the removal of
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
o
political disabilities from women has been brought to bear on it.
It has, indeed, been asserted by several of the speakers, that all
the reason is on their side of the question, and the assertion has
not been disproved. “The objections of our opponents,” said
Dr. Lyon Playfair at the meeting at St. James’s Hall, “are
entirely of a sentimental character.”
Now, while perfectly concurring in the judgment that in
deciding all questions affecting great human interests, reason
should have the first place and sentiment the second; and that
in this particular question there is a weight of reason on one
side, and on the other nothing but sentiment, and sentiment
mostly of a very weak and washy character, it ought not to be
put so completely out of the question as the advocates of the
measure generally do. For even were the stout offensive weapons
of reason sheathed altogether, it could hold its ground, and ulti
mately win its way by the preponderating force of the highest
and purest sentiment it has in its favour.
There is now, say the opponents of Woman Suffrage, an
amiable forbearance to the ignorances and follies of women, and
an affection—occasionally a little contemptuous, no doubt—for
their weakness and defects, on the part of men, which is very
pleasant to see; while, on the other hand, women look up to
men with a sweet fearful humility, confide their whole social
and moral well-being to them with a beautiful unquestioning
trustfulness that is equally delightful and refreshing to behold.
All of which would be utterly destroyed by the social equality
of the sexes that the gift of political power to women would
necessary entail; and also by the intellectual equality that,
women’s minds being thus raised to take interest in a higher
range of subjects than they have yet done, must inevitably
follow. One honourable member of the House of Commons, in
the recent debate, reminded his brethren that a woman’s husband
should rule over her, and that “fear and blushing” were her
proper mental and physical conditions: while another dutifully
called to their remembrance the “ illogical and unreasonable
words which they had heard at their mothers’ knees,” and
warned them that if this bill passed their sons and grandsons to
come would have no such agreeable recollections to solace and
comfort them in manhood and old age. He also called upon
them to observe the dangerous element of priestly power that
would thus be introduced into our legislature, priests and such
like persons having always a pernicious influence over the illo
gical minds of women; a line of talk—I won’t dignify it by the
name of argument—carried still further by another honourable
member, who, with the eye of a seer, perceived in Woman
Suffrage the beginning of a Jesuitical rule that would ultimately
submerge all the Protestant liberties of England.
r!
But none of these honourable gentleman saw in this Bill the
foundation of a hope that finds a place in the breast of every
�4
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
one who takes a large and comprehensive view of society as it
has been, as it is, as it may be in the time to come ; for a new
and higher, and—for both—a happier moral and intellectual
relation of the sexes than the contemptuous forbearance and
terrified confidence—the latter too often misplaced—that, on the
showing of those who are doing their utmost to maintain it,
form the type of the existing state of things. Looking each no
further than himself and his own illogical woman—or women,
as the member for Kilmarnock naively suggested—whom he
finds it agreeable to him to have and to hold in a state of admir
ing subjection to his superior wisdom, their minds were closed
to that far nobler conception of the human life, in its twofold
aspect, that the promoters of this Bill aspire to see realised
among us; not, as now, exceptionally, but universally, as
humanity advances still further towards perfection. The conception of man and woman united, not as the master and the
slave, the possessor and the possessed, which places an almost
insurmountable barrier between their moral natures, but as co
inheritors of all freedom and knowledge and truth; working
together for the same great end, the moral, intellectual, and
physical advancement of the human race. The diversities of
the two natures, not of necessity dividing them in every aim
and object and pursuit in life, but recognised rather as intended
that, the two working for the same purpose, each shall supply
the lack of the other. The inequalities of two natures fitted
together until they become one nature ; the greater breadth of
thought filling the space left by the narrower ; the firmer grasp
of mind holding the weaker in its place ; the quicker perceptions
stimulating the slower; the readier sympathies bringing out the
more backward; and the more acute reasoning faculties, and
the more profound, giving each to each what the other wants,
all joined together harmoniously to form a perfect whole.
This is the relation between the sexes that those who are
demanding the political equality of women hope to see arise,
upon the destruction of the other which the opponents of the
measure say—and with the very correct prescience—will be its
inevitable result.
But that such a relation could be established until women
have equal political rights and equal educational advantages
with men is impossible. It is met with now, no doubt, but only
in rare individual cases where men, contemning the power the
law gives them, practically make it a dead letter, and where
women, having educated themselves, notwithstanding that they
are deprived of political rights, work by any indirect means that
they can to advance great political ends, the furtherence of social
reforms and the general welfare of the community. But the
number of men who, having power, will not use it, are few.
And the number of women who will have convictions and
interests without the right to give them effect, and who will have
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
$
tie Courage and resolution to work on themselves to undo all
that governess, and the schoolmistress, and the world in general
have done for them—and when they have destroyed the super
structure of folly and frivolity and falsehood that these have
raised up upon their minds to build another of true knowledge
and common sense there instead—are fewer still. For it is a
(much harder thing to do ; truly any one of the labours of Hercules was light in comparison ! And yet this is what every
woman must do who wants to raise herself out of the slough of
Ignorance and apathy and error about everything that is good
and great, in which the majority of her sex are sunk, unless she
kappen to have had the good fortune not to be educated at all,
When her labour is diminished one half.
®ie folly that supposes political rights and educational advan
tages would make every woman aspire to rule the State and
toeglcet her personal duties, is scarcely worth noticing. It is
sufficient for its refutation to say that as the power to vote does
not make the bank-clerk or the shopkeeper neglect his desk or
OffittBter, to indulge in dreams of being Chancellor of the Ex
chequer or Prime Minister, there can be no possible grounds for
Supposing that it would make his mother or sister do so : or, if
dreaded universal suffrage came to pass, his wife or daughter
either; even though they were all educated to be bank clerks
and shopkeepers’ wives and mothers, instead of poor imitations
of fine ladies as they are at present. Placing women on an
equality with men would never raise them .above them. The
*
terror that some of these lower orders of men now indulge in, of
the world under the new regime coming to such a pass that they
Would have none but female Gladstones and John Stuart Mills
®nd Professor Huxleys in petticoats to marry, is without a shadow
of .foundation. Education will always be controlled by capacity,
if not by circumstance ; while, given its fair chance, genius is
sure to rise to its own level.
But, as all political economists know, everyone who works
Conscientiously and intelligently in his own place—be that place
ever so small and obscure a one—is giving his quota of help to
#ie prosperity of the State. And it is hard for women, whatever
be their place, to work either conscientiously or intelligently,
with the moral and mental obliquities, consequent on their mis
directed education, and the degraded social status that they suffer
from at present.
Another of the fanciful terrors that haunt the minds of men
opposed to women having political power, and the natural con
sequence of political power, political convictions, is, that
politics would then form one of the general topics of conversa
tion between men and women in society, and would introduce
an dement of bitterness and dissension instead of the sweet
That remains to be seen.
[Present Author.}
�6
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
melliferousness that now characterises such intercourse. This
spectre, it is true, has some more reality about him than those
already disposed of; he has rattling bones at least, and is Lnot
one of the mere “airy nothings” they were. I admit that
women having a knowledge of, and an interest in, questions that
men only are now informed about and interested in, would be
likely to alter, to a very considerable degree, what is at present
the almost prevailing tone of the mixed society of both sexes.
But I cannot think that this would be an evil; on the con
trary, I believe that it would be a good; and a good so great
that to bring it about would be alone worth making the change.
As society at present exists, conversation between young men
and women, who are in person or manner excessively un
attractive to each other, is utterly insane and uninteresting to
both, and done merely as a duty to society. But, on the con
trary, if there be anything outwardly attractive in either to the
other, often when only very slightly attractive, sometimes
when merely negative, this intercourse assumes a tone called
by different names in the parlance of society, but which is, in
reality, a mutual excitation, or attempt at excitation, in a greater
or less degree, of sexual feelings, equally pernicious in its
effects on both. This will doubtless be called exaggeration,
but I need only point to the lists of broken troth-plights and
miserable marriages that the newspapers and each person’s
private circle of acquaintance furnish to verify the truth of the
assertion. What do these innumerable cases of men and
women, without the slightest real affinity in their natures, rush
ing into engagements and unions that end either in shameful
faithlessness or miserable bondage arise from but the fact that,
in the ordinary intercourse between men and women, there is
no opening for either to know anything of the other’s real mind
or disposition, while every effort is made on both sides to excite
a spurious admiration and love ? *
With no fear that educated Englishmen and Englishwomen
will ever be roused by political feeling to throw wine-glasses or
tea-cups at each other’s heads, or, in any other way, to forget
the respect due to each other, and each other’s honest convic
tions, serious thinking people might well rejoice to see elements
introduced into their association that would develop their real
sympathies and antipathies, bringing together only those whom
nature intended to be brought together, and sundering those
who ought to be sundered. “Fancy,” cry the ghoul-hunted
“a Conservative man married to a Radical woman, or vice versa!
There would be an end to all domestic peace ! ” We need
fancy no such thing. The skeleton of the rattling bones puts
* As spurious it is no doubt pernicious ; but were Divine Order fol
lowed, and sexual relations placed on a different footing, it would not be
so. [Present Author.]
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
7
this phantom completely to rout. On the showing of those
whose imaginations are frighted by these hobgoblins, such a
thing would be an impossibility. But without going so far as
to suppose that Conservative young men and Radical young
women, or the reverse, would ever be led, by the difference of
their opinions, to pull each other’s hair or punch each other’s
heads when they met in society, we must believe that the great
differences of mind that lead to these two mental conditions
would then be so apparent that there would be no possibility of
making a mistake on the subject; though the mistake may
easily occur under the present state of things, when, if a woman
happen to have any unlawful political opinions, she is frightened
into concealing them by the threat of her else incurring the
dreaded odium of all her male acquaintances.
But, with a new era of equal rights and equal knowledge for
women, we may hope to see this reign of terror for both sexes
come to an end. Then the day will come when a man will
not shrink, through a miserable vanity and self-conceit, from
owning that his wife is gifted with reason, as he is, and has the
same right to use it; above all, when he will be ashamed to
proclaim before his countrymen that he believes her to be such
a slave to the bigotry and superstition of priests, that even his
great controlling wisdom cannot direct her how to use her liberty
aright, and that he, therefore, dreads to give her the common free
dom and rights of a citizen—rather when he will rejoice in
having beside him a companion and fellow-worker to aid him in
carrying out his greatest aims, and in realising his highest
aspirations.—I am, &c.,
Alice Perrier.
Still more powerful is the following extract from a pam
phlet on the same subject by a well-known writer and
lecturer, Mrs. Annie Besant:—
Lastly, I would urge on those who believe in women’s natural
inferiority, why, in the name of common sense, are you so
terribly afraid of putting your theory to the proof? Open to
women the learned professions; unlock the gates which bar her
out from your mental strifes; give her no favour, no special
advantage; let her race you on even terms. She must fail, if
nature be against her—she must be beaten, if nature has in
capacitated her for the struggle. Why do you fear to let her
challenge you, if she is weighted not only with the transmitted
effects of long centuries of inferiority, but is also bound with
nature’s iron chain? Try. If you are so sure about nature’s
verdict, do not fear her arbitration; but if you shrink from our
rivalry, wemustbelievethatyoufeel ourequality, and, to cover your
own doubts of your superiority, you prattle about our feebleness.
“Women are indifferent about the possession of the fran
chise.” If this is altogether true, it is very odd that there
�8
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
should be so much agitation going on about the subject. But I
am quite willing to grant that the mass of women are indif
ferent about the matter. Alas! it has always been so. Those
who stand up to champion an oppressed class do not look for
gratitude from those for whom they labour. It is the bitterest
curse of oppression that it crushes out in the breast of the
oppressed the very wish to be free. A man once spent long
years in the Bastille ; shut up in his youth, old age found him
still in his dungeon. The people assailed the prison, and
amongst others, this prisoner was set free; but the sunshine
was agony to the eyes long accustomed to the darkness, and the
fresh stir of life was as thunder to the ears accustomed to the
silence of the dungeon; the prisoner pleaded to be kept a prisoner
still. Was his action a proof that freedom is not fair? The slaves,
after generations of bondage, were willing to remain slaves
where their masters were kind and good. Is this a proof that
liberty is not the birthright of a man ? And this rule holds
good in all, and not only in the extreme cases I have cited.
Habit, custom, make hard things easy. If a woman is educated
to regard man as her natural lord, she will do so. If the man
to whom her lot falls is kind to her, she will be contented; if
he is unkind, she will be unhappy; but, unless she be an excep
tional character, she will not think of resistance. But women
are now beginning to think of resistance ; a deep, low, mur
muring is going on, suppressed as yet, but daily growing in
intensity; and such a murmur has always been the herald of
revolt. Further, do men think of what they are doing when
they taunt the present agitators with the indifference shown
by women? They are, in effect, telling us, that if we are in
earnest in this matter, we must force it on their attention; we
must agitate till every home in England rings with the subject;
we must agitate till mass meetings in every town compel them
to hear us ; we must agitate till every woman has our arguments
at her fingers’ end. Ah! you are not wise to throw in our
*
teeth the indifference of women. You are stinging us into a
determination that this indifference shall not last; you are nerving
us to a struggle, which will be fiercer than you dream ; you are
forcing us into an agitation which will convulse the State. You
dare to make indifference a plea for injustice. Very well; then
the indifference shall soon be a thing of the past. You have as
yet the frivolous, the childish, the thoughtless on your side; but
the cream of womanhood is against you. We will educate women
to reason and to think, and then the mass will only want a leader.
However, it is not to be pretended that philosophic, any
* Argumentative agitation ought of course, to be tried in the first
place; but, should arguments fail, women have a reserve force in
waiting. [Present Author. ]
�THE JEOTJCATION OR GIRLS.
more than diplomatic, controversy can be carried on withont a definite basis of negotiation ; and if we are to predi
cate right and wrong of a given state or states of society at
large, we must adopt some standard of what ought to be,
whereby to judge the character of what is. It hardly needs
to be said that the standard adopted in this work is the
hypothesis of the work—namely, the essential spiritual
Supremacy of woman over every other being in the universe,
and so of course over the universe of Nature itself, in the
same manner in which an individual woman is over and
above her own speech or her own clothes. Hence it is
necessary to take the religious aspect of the question as the
fundamental groundwork of every other aspect; for indeed
religion is truly but the final summing-up of all kinds of
practical utility.
The great lesson to be learnt, the fundamental axiom to
be engrained upon the mind of every one who aspires to
break the fetters wrought by a false and evil social edu
cation, is that this question of woman’s spiritual birthright
is one about which there can be no sort of parley or com
promise. The writer of the letter to the Examiner speaks in
a tone which seems to encourage the idea of sexual equality.
Now this is right enough in a certain restricted sense, but
in that only. It is only in view of the temporal co-operatfon of the sexes toward reunion in the Divine Female
Unity that the question of equality can be entertained. It
is certainly requisite that women should compete with men
on fair and equitable terms in all mundane matters, great and
small, in the government of Europe and America, as at the
chess-board, or in any other game. But to infer, from the
fact of the two sexes getting on best by mutual help and
competition in the earth-world, that man can be the equal
of woman spiritually, is neither more nor less than to make
Good and Evil equal, or two Infinites—a manifest ab
surdity. It is the destiny of the masculine or evil principle
in the universe to be finally reabsorbed into the feminine or
good principle, and so annihilated; hence doctrine or prac
tice which may be inconsistent with this knowledge must
always end in futility and failure, as it always has done.
This being clearly understood, and the spiritual dominion
*
* Demonstration of the doctrines thus sketched cannot be given
■within the compass of this pamphlet, which has a more immediate and
practical purpose.
�10
THE EDUCATION OE GIRLS.
being put aside as inherently and essentially belonging to
woman only, we can afford to be quite impartial between
the sexes in all other concerns. And the best service
which those who have the opportunity can render to women
is not to flatter or favour them, but to provide fair oppor
tunities for both sexes to compete, and then pay or reward
by results only, and not according to the sex of the worker,
or on any other extraneous consideration. There will, pro
bably, always be some physical matters in which a man can
do better than a woman, just as there are others in which a
horse or ox can do better than a man; these will soon show
themselves under any regime. For the rest open competition
will prove woman’s best title-deed.
The one-sided system under which we live cramps
the efforts even of wealthy benevolence. We see many
a wealthy philanthropist, no doubt, men who would do
good far and wide if they could, and who would not be
narrow and selfish if they could help it. But they cannot
help it so long as the social atmosphere they breathe is one
of general suspicion and distrust, of caution against being
over-reached, even by one’s friends, for their own benefit or
aggrandisement; so long as misunderstanding and envy
take the place of co-operation and sympathy. And I say
that so long as one of the sexes—and that the higher sex—
is kept from its rights, and artificially stunted in its capaci
ties, this state of things cannot be altered. History will
repeat itself with its woes and horrors, for there is
nothing to prevent similar circumstances kindling similar
passions, however hard they may have been scrubbed
in the meanwhile by the polishing-brush of an unsound
civilisation.
The Dialogists may now appear.
Adam. You know well, Ish, how to state your views
forcibly; but a good statement does not always involve a
strong case. Granted the folly and unmanliness of sitting
down helpless under admitted evils, it does not follow that
we are safe in receiving with open arms the first worldbetterer who comes forward with an offer of ready made
universal regeneration. Many plausible panaceas have been
tried, and you will agree with me that they have all failed
in their main object. Wh^ should we expect for yours a
better fortune than for all those that have gone before ?
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
11
Ish. The upshot of all which is—that there is never to he a
sensible improvement here in the circumstances of mankind!
If so, I think Wordsworth’s supposition about fire coming
down from far to scorch earth’s pleasant habitations and
dry up old ocean, in his bed left singed and bare, was no
idle one. The sooner this planet is burnt the better. After
all, the idea is not peculiar to Wordsworth or to his times.
Paul, I think, said something about the elements melting
some day with fervent heat; and thus much, at any rate, is
well known, that certain of the heavenly bodies have
already disappeared suddenly and unaccountably. May we
not reasonably fancy that their inhabitants had been offered
the last chance and would not take it ? But putting poets
and theologians aside, it is quite safe to say that in the
absence of much greater knowledge than our men of science
yet possess concerning the possible contingent causes of
sudden generation of excessive heat in the sun or in some
still more powerful star—the tenure of this little tem
poral home of ours, with its beauties and its drawbacks,
may be much more precarious than we are accustomed
to believe.
A. Save us, Ish! that is a tremendous threat. I hope
this earth will take care to improve before so violent a
remedy as that becomes necessary.
I. Not on its present style of going on. But my hope and
belief is that things will change for the better and obviate
all occasion for the human race to be rubbed out, and have
to begin again at the beginning.
A. I hope so too. I do not go so far as to deny the
likelihood of the world being bettered, I assure you.
I. Well, then, how far do you go ? Let us have something
definite.
A. I mean no more than what I have already said, that a
heavy burden of proof lies on the side of such innovation as
yours.
I. As heavy as you please. Only the proof, mind you,
lies not in talking, but in doing. I do not ask you or society
to take my words for anything ; I ask you to do your duty
by woman, and set her free from her present thralls, and it
will then be for her, not me, to prove the truth of what I
say. The burden of proof may |ie upon me, but the burden
of unperformed duty lies upon your side ; and that is a far
more serious matter.
�12
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
A. Ah, then you do not rest your claim for woman’s
emancipation upon the fact of her essential divinity ?
I. Certainly not. I make, it is true, both claims; but
they are quite independent of each other. I arraign you in
the first instance for systematically ill-treating a portion,
the greater portion, I believe, of mankind. That is the first
step ; my assertion of her exclusive divinity is a step beyond.
A. I see. Well, then, to deal with the first step; how
does it happen that the female race exists in a generally
inferior position to the male race all over the world? You
denounce the fact as an abuse; but I should like to hear
you account for it.
I. It happens simply by the law of brute force; which
law, as humanity develops more, that is, rises in the scale of
its own being, gradually gives way to the higher law, that
of spiritual force, which is woman’s strength.
A. You mean, then, that man has no other superiority
over woman than that which great brutes have over him.
I. Just so.
A. But is it so? Putting causes aside, and looking to
their effects, do you not find yourself obliged for candour’s
sake to allow that, as men and women have hitherto been
and still are, the male sex has excelled the female in per
formances which savour not at all of the brutal, but quite
the contrary ? To take notorious instances near home,
what woman has written like Shakspere, has composed like
Beethoven—in short, not to enlarge, where have women
hitherto accomplished works in any department open to both
sexes equal to the best that men have accomplished ? It
does seem to me strange at the outset, that the superior sex
should be beaten by the inferior in nearly all—I am by no
means sure I might not say quite all—real practical doings.
I will add that, let alone higher things, it has yet to be
shown that men could not, by practice, also tend children,
and make beds, and mend clothes, and do all other domestic
duties commonly supposed to be women’s special province,
as well, aye and better, than women themselves. I am free
to avow that my notion of superiority is one of superior
performance even more than of beautiful appearance; and
if women generally cannot do what men generally can, what
is their superiority worth, even if it exist? You see, it is
one thing to aspire to the glories of heaven, and another to
condescend to recognise the utilities of earth.
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
13
I. Is that meant to imply that the glories of heaven are
not worth taking trouble about, while the utilities of earth
are? At any rate, then, let the glories of heaven be left
to woman, and let man confine himself to the utilities of earth.
A. No, but I don’t see how to reach the higher without
employing the lower.
I. Well, man has certainly not reached the glories of
heaven by his able use of earthly means. There can hardly
therefore, be that connection between the two which you suppose J
A. Come then, I waive heaven; woman shall be welcome
to it, so long as you leave earth to man.
I. I might retort that a compulsory cession is not meri
torious ; but let that pass. I cannot, however, leave man
to his misrule and usurpation of earth.
A. I suppose he must go to hell, then ?
I. Nay, nay; justice between the sexes in this world
makes the best earth for the male sex and the best heaven
for the female. But that justice has yet to be done.
When it is done, done in fulness without stint or reserve,
then the nations who sit in darkness and in the shadow of
death will have seen the beginning of a new heaven and a
new earth wherein shall dwell righteousness.
I grant, however, that your case would look strong enough
so far as regards the test by works, if only you could show
that women have had equal opportunities with men, and
therefore that their backwardness in productive arts must
proceed from some inherent defect of their nature. But
my argument—which I shall proceed to make good in detail
—is that the reason why women have not turned out Shaksperes and Beethovens, &c., is because they have not
been trained from early youth in such a manner as to give
their latent faculties a fair chance. I do not say but what
there might always remain a perceptible sexual difference
of mind as well as of body; but you have no ground for
assuming that such difference would place the female at
disadvantage; on the contrary, it is evident that analogy__
the only test we have to go by—points to a superiority on
the female side in the department of mind corresponding
to that she already undisputedly possesses in that of matter
—her physical beauty. Meanwhile, I am satisfied for the
present if you sincerely concede the first step and give up
the religious department of life to woman unreservedly.
�14
THE EDUCATION OF GIFTS.
ESSAY
‘ But now
‘
II.
been, how worse than
[blind !
Day by day we resist thy saving grace.’
blind have we
in. iv. iv.
The Dialogists may resume.
A. Come to the point, Ish; what do you formally pro
pose to substitute for a woman’s present surroundings and
bringing up ?
I. I propose, in a few words, that woman, from her
earliest infancy shall be systematically developed instead of
being systematically repressed and snubbed, as she is.
A. How is she so ? I must say that I cannot see it.
I. Let us begin, then, at the beginning proper, the
earliest influences common to childhood; and you will
discover, before we have done, that these influences are the
same as, or strictly analogous with, those which determine
our character at the close of this life—character, that one
thing which though we brought it not with us into the world,
yet it is certain we must carry out. The child is father to
the man, as Wordsworth says, in this sense, that the career
of the adult is foreshadowed by the peculiarities of the
infant; but then these peculiarities themselves assume a
healthy or an unhealthy form, accordingly as they are judi
ciously or injudiciously treated by those who have the rear
ing of the young mind.
Now, although between the treatment respectively of a
girl and of a boy just born there can hardly be much external
difference, there will, nevertheless, be a difference, too
subtle for ordinary people to observe, perhaps, but by no
means too subtle to affect the infants. I mean the differ
ence of what is termed atmosphere, in reference to the
spiritual world. Even while the new-born babe is wrapped
in a flannel covering and taken in the nurse’s arms, the
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
15
persons around the latter will begin to make their observa
tions ; and their words, which the babe cannot understand,
will be accompanied with looks expressive of affection or of
indifference, which there is good reason to believe it can.
The tones of the voice also have ei idently a strong effect
both on children and on lower animals. Now, without
assuming that we should everywhere meet with much differ
ence in the welcome given to a male or a female child;
without any ignoring of the fact that girls are often wel
comed where boys would not be—still I maintain that the
impulses generally evoked by the birth of a girl into a family,
the discussion of her promise of attractiveness, her possible
prospects in matrimony, &c., in short, her tacitly recognised
place as a tributary and appendage to the male—these things
floating and being ventilated around her, almost from the
very hour of her birth, coagulate the first stratum of that
poisoned spiritual atmosphere wherein she is destined to
grow up. The fondness for a baby girl felt in particular
instances by her parents and nurses may happen to exceed
that for a boy; but the fondness is of a different kind.
Ordinary persons have been accustomed to look upon boys
as those intended hereafter to be equals among themselves
in proportion to rank and wealth, and to be the masters of
women in their respective degrees. Consequently, it is not
to be expected that the future superior and the future
inferior in all matters of life should be regarded at the
outset of their lives with the same kind of affection, even
where the degree of it is in favour of the girl.
Thus, even before parents or guardians have begun to
dogmatise about the religious or moral training up of the
new-born girl, the atmosphere of that small society into
which she comes at her birth is dead against her. Of warm
love she may receive plenty; but it is rarely love of the
most precious kind; at the best, it is love that will provide
all attainable comforts and advantages for her lower nature,
and leave—nay, lead—her higher nature to perish. Be they
to whose care the infant is committed Jews, Christians,
Mahomedans, non-religionists, what you will, they all agree
in a common warfare against the divine order of the universe.
So the new-born girl inhales an atmosphere dead against her
spiritual life, so soon as her young eyes can discern faces
and her ears distinguish tones.
Let it not be thought that kindness of any sort, however
�16
THE EDUCATION OE GTKL.S.
mistaken its mode of working, is to be depreciated. The
young blind, led by the adult blind, will both, indeed, fall
into the ditch; but no one is further than I am from
disbelieving that the blind guides, as a rule, do their best
for their infant charge; and, moreover, I am sure that
there are some amongst them so honest and single-minded in
their simplicity, as to be capable of turning aside from the
evil way and walking in the right one, if only they could be
shown it. But, unfortunately, these are not the persons
who in this world form the mind and set the fashions of
society. It would almost seem as if mental culture were
laboured for only to be abused, so that in place of the head
being ruled by a good heart, the heart is misruled by a
perverted head until it has ceased to be honest. At any
rate, the knowledge of the sanctity hitherto attained by the
classes who make it their profession, has not exceeded that
amount which is proverbially dangerous ; the history of
priestcraft being a history of knowledge sufficient to become
an engine for misleading the masses, but not sufficient to
demonstrate beforehand what the event proves, that such
policy must bring about the falsification and corruption of
all social relations, and sooner or later bring down on its
authors and promoters the just execration of the lamely pro
gressing nations of the earth—still just, even although the
nations themselves were doubly in fault; first for having
made to themselves those crooked rules, and then for not
cutting them down like rotten trees so soon as ever their
character appeared. That character, it is true, depends
upon society, which thus moves in a vicious circle. A
superstitious laity sets up priests without natural qualifica
tion for their office; and these naturally take advantage of
their position to keep the laity conveniently superstitious.
And so the wheel goes round, without remedy, that I can
see, but in calling to our aid the dormant capacity of the
female race, and substituting the religion of nature and true
humanity for an ignoble idolatry which usurps its place.
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
17
ESSAY III.
[The same continued.']
I. I said that the fact of its social surroundings tending
to affect the character of an infant, is one which not all
minds may be able to comprehend. I think, however, that
few will be able to follow me into the next field of inquiry,
a spacious and sunny ground, where the objects to which I
shall direct attention are large, and simple, and common;
so that no hearer of my words shall be able to plead the
miserable excuse of his own intellectual weakness.
However hazy may be the notions many people have
concerning such things as spiritual atmosphere, they ought
to be able to follow me when 1 pass on to the period where
children begin to speak their little syllables and to take in
the drift of short sentences spoken to them, to distinguish
faces constantly seen, and to exercise acts of recent memory.
And here, in this manifest opening of education, comme-ces
the working of that evil spell which is to bruise and bll lit
the opening powers of the female child, and through her to
ruin the character of the male children with whom she con
verses, and through both to people the world with beings
who grow up, the one sex to be but half men, the other, it
is hardly exaggeration to say, not women at all.
Where, then, is the commencement of this evil spell’s
operation ? A little girl who has brothers ought to be inti
lectually the better for it; the sexual character of mines,
under the present terrestrial dispensation, being as much
intended for reciprocation as that of bodies. But what
benefits do we actually find ? The girl a year or two old,
just able to prattle and comprehend a few sentences, is at
once put by her mother or nurse, or both, into subjection
under her male companions on every occasion of a little
nursery quarrel about playthings, or some other storm in a
tea-cup. At best the little brothers are told that they should
give way to the little sisters on principles of chivalry, &c.,
�18
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
so far as children can be taught such things ; that is to say,
because they are supposed to be the stronger, being: boys,
and the strong should always be generous to the weak. The
boy is to be kind to the girl on the principle that the merci
ful man is to be kind to his beast. I don’t mean that people
tell boys this in express words : but if they insinuate it that is
just as bad. They are doing their best, however unwit
tingly, to train up a child in the way of sacrilege and wrong;
and when he is old—nay, when he has attained the prime
of life—he will not depart from it.
A. Spoken like yourself, Ish. And, indeed, I am alive to
the reality of how much may be done by early impressions
for good or ill; but are you not making too much of it ?
For my part, I should be inclined to leave mothers and
nurses alone until the children are old enough to come
under wider influences, and then take care that these new
influences, which can easily be made to obliterate the old
ones, are of the right sort.
I. But why, my good friend, why go putting off to a
convenient season the duty which it behoves us to do to
day ? Why adopt or sanction a system of beginning wickedly
and foolishly, in the ungrounded confidence that you will
afterwards proceed righteously and wisely? If you may
spiritually debase your daughters at, say, four years old,
why not at seven ; if at seven, why not at seventeen, and so
on? Do you imagine it is so easy to say to the powers of
darkness, Thus far shall je go, and no further? No, no;
the only safety is in teaching children the principles of
divine order so soon as they are able to learn anything.
And I do not pretend that it will be a light task to neutra
lise the evil influence of so many past generations. But it
has to be done ; therefore, the sooner all classes buckle to
the business the better for all.
A. Well, but, Ish, how, for instance, in teaching young
children, would you account to them for the greater brute
force of the male ?
I. In the first place, I have great doubts whether this
quiet assumption about the male’s greater physical force is
not an utter delusion—I mean, of course, when we com
pare males and females of the same calibre. Of course, I
do not deny that men in general grow to a larger stature
than women in general, and have proportionally so much
more of that force which is identical with material weight.
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
It
Although, mind you, there is no reason why this order of
nature should continue. A very few generations might reverse
it. For instance, I believe the largest and tallest huma^
being now alive is a woman who lately exhibited herse1^London; and I lately read somewhere that Cuvier remarked ’
that the largest and heaviest brain he ever exfLmine(j wag...
that of a woman. These little straws show that tpe wjnq
seed not always set in the direction of Loan’s superiority
*
even in mere brute weight and its force, Moreover let me
remind you that enormous importance should attach to the
notorious fact that the existing modes of life of men and
boys generally is very much more calculated to develop
and haiden muscle than that of women and girls. So much
the worse for society and its customs; nevertheless, such
is the fact. And the difference between the muscles of the
same person properly exercised and not properly exercised,
is second only to that between the muscles of different
persons. Meanwhile, if great brute weight or force is ■
to be called superiority well and good. Only in that case, while you point out to children how 11 superior ” man isto woman, you must also point out to them how “ supe
rior” the elephant is to man, how “ superior” a great steamengine is to an elephant, how “superior” a falling cliff or
an irruption of the sea is to the steam-engine. Let it once
be cleaily settled that superiority means simply a greater
mass of inert matter, and then the assertion that man is
generally woman’s “ superior ” remains harmless so lon°- as
it holds good.
°
A. But are you sure that in a state of society where men
am women had equal opportunities and no favour physically
Old mentally, there would not be some performances in which
men would always excel women, as there would be others
m which women would excel men ?
7. I know of no evidence to show that men need always
surpass women in anything except those kinds of hard
labour, e.g., carrying heavy loads, which a woman in preg.
nancy, or during her menstrual periods, ought certainly to
avoid if possible.
J
. .4’
now> Ish, how would you take measures for
initiating very young children into your doctrine of Divine
‘
Order, so as to prevent the young religious or aspiring
faculty from going wrong ?
X I do not see that there is any necessity fcr trying thei?
�20
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS
heads with deep matters at all. Not the ineffable Tetragrammaton, the universal one, but Elohim, the Godhead or
Divine Plurality—in other words, not Woman, but her re
presentative aspects, or individual women—constitute the
temporal object of worship which alone can belong to our
temporal conditions. We can worship and behold the One
olny through and in the Many.
A. Bless us, Ish ! do not you call that a deep matter? I
should like to find the child who could be posted up in it.
I. But, my dear Sir, alb you have to teach children is
that they are never to worship any other object than a
female—their own mother in the first instance, if you like.
As they get older, the idea can be gradually extended from
the single individual. Surely that is both simple and
natural.
A. Not quite such plain sailing as it might seem It is
all very well to talk of worship; but you yourself, Ish, had
you been taught on your present principles when you were
a child, would have knelt before a particular woman or girl,
and prayed to her with a homage as purely external and
objective as the attention paid to an article of food set
before you, and perhaps also as vague as, let us say, one’s
ordinary notion of “ London ” or “ the sea.”
1. Well, I cannot help that. Of course children’s worship
will be childish. All we can do is to see that rudimentary
and inchoate religion shall not develop wrongly. If a child
can only “ love ” a woman in the way that “ Charley Cram
loved raspberry jam,” that, at any rate, is better than its
living in awe of the detestable nightmare of a false god,
as all children who are taught religion at all are still com
pelled to do.
A. Return your sword, Ish; we must examine these
minutiae dispassionately.
1. Willingly. I have said nothing, however, but what I
am prepared deliberately to repeat.
A. Well then, now suppose that a child has reached that
stage of religious development where it can begin to extend
the sphere of its worship of women, or rather of woman ;
and suppose that two or more of those lovely objects of
worship happen to fall out and tear each other’s character
to rags, in their young devotee’s presence. It strikes me
that the growing Church of the Future would soon learn
that in mutual scolding, if in nothing else, the Divine
�THE EDUCATION OP GIRLS.
Plurality undoubtedly excels her humble subject, the
male.
I. Well, that would be the first lesson—rather a rude one,
it is true, and therefore to be avoided if possible—upon the
difference hetween the Unity and the Plurality, between
perfection and imperfection. Indeed they are pretty sure
to find out imperfections and inconsistencies in the objects
of their worship under even the most favourable circum
stances ; therefore it is to be kept in view that they should
learn to look higher than the individual, so soon as they are
able to understand the simple formula that there is a Woman
greater and better than all other women, who rules the
(world, and some day or other will set right everything that
goes wrong here. This, of course, is but a child’s way of
looking at the matter, and perhaps better modes of convey
ing the truth might be stated; all I strenuously insist on is
that though it may be impossible to convey the whole truth
to the young child, it is at all events possible, and a solemn
duty, moreover, to convey to it nothing but the truth.
Where there’s a will there’s a way : and if mothers, nurses,
&c., only set themselves right, it is not likely that the infants
and children under their care will wander far from the path
of Divine Order.
41. I should be glad, nevertheless, to hear something more
like explicit directions.
I. You must not rate any directions of this sort which I
can give as anything more positive than suggestion. Here
is a suggestion, however, if you please. If it be desired that
children begin religious practice very early, say by repeating
a short sentence at bed-time, why not tell them that the God
to whom this little prayer is made is simply a Woman, like,
btft more lovely than, all other women together, and that
though She cannot be seen and talked with in this life, yet
if we pray to Her and trust in Her now, we shall live in
enjoyment with Her in a happier life hereafter? To a very
intelligent child it might be added that in that happier life
there will be only women and girls, all good men having
been changed into them; but this could only be said use
fully to very thoughtful children. There then, Adam, I
have done my best to throw you out a hint or sketch; you
or others might, no doubt, easily improve upon it. Anyhow
it is right so far as it goes, though that be only a little way.
You would have shown the children—or put them in the
�22
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS
right road to find out—that the God to whom they pray is
an ever ready help and comfort in trouble, an ever ready
eompanion and sympathiser in pleasures, be they ever so
childish, a real God at hand to heal and bless, not a false
and mean and revengeful and selfish God afar off to disap
point and mock.
A. Yes ; I see no objection to that.
I. Contrast such a faith of living warm sweetness and
reality, which daily experience and spontaneous observation
would mainly tend to confirm without the aid of unnatural
distortive struggles of imagination—contrast it with the cold
blast of Infinity, or with the bloody horrors of the historic
tragedy on Calvary. Is there not between the two kinds of
religious education almost the difference between giving a
a child its mother’s milk, and dashing its head against the
stones ?
Those who have young children to bring up will do well
to consider that they live in an age of rapid transition,
when the old faiths are crumbling away and fated soon to
lie mingled with the dust. Hence, to bring up children in
reliance upon those collapsing walls is decidedly worse
than to give them no religious education at all. It is but
to expend time, labour, and means upon work which will
have to be picked to pieces, upon lessons which will have
to be unlearnt, and unlearnt by no means cheaply. If in
deed a new and higher dispensation appear too startling to
be acquiesced in at once, it is surely better to suspend
judgment than to persist in a futile and discreditable course.
Let parents consider that their children, when they are
grown up men and women, living under a stronger and
purer light, will assuredly not hold them blameless, will
assuredly not esteem blundering affection any sufficient
excuse for having forced their young charge to cling by
their side to that which was visibly and palpably rotten.
A. You speak very harshly of beliefs which, although I
do not share them, are dear to many harmless and benevo
lent people.
I. I mean no injury to any one’s creed, regarded as a
purely religious ideal. But when that creed is made the
pretext for a social and political code of injustice and
oppression, it must incur the condemnation due to the
wrongs which it is abused to sanction.
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
23
ESSAY IV.
[Ish’s Discourse continued.]
*
1 Sic fatur lacrymans classique immittit habenas the
Saturday Review of January 4th, 1868 :—
'There are, it must be owned, few things on earth of less interest
at first sight than a girl in her teens. She is a mere bundle of
pale, colourless virtues, a little shy, slightly studious, passively
obedient, tamely religious. Her tastes are “simple;” she has
to particular preference, that is, for anything; her aims incline
mildly towards a future of balls to come ; her rule of life is an
hourly reference to “ mamma.” She is without even the charm
of variety; she has been hot-pressed in the most approved
finishing establishments, and is turned out the exact double of
her sister, or her cousin, or her friend, with the same stereotyped
manner, the same smattering of accomplishments, the same con
tribution to society of her little sum of superficial information.
We wonder how it is that any one can take an interest in a creature
of this sort, just as we wonder how any one can take an interest
in the Court Circular. And yet there are few sentiments more
pardonable, as there are none more national than our interest in
that marvellous document___ It is precisely the same interest
which attaches us to the loosely-tied bundle of virtue and accom
plishments which we call a girl. We recognise in her our future
ruler. The shy, modest creature who has no thought but a
dance, and no will but mamma’s, will in a few years be our
master, changing our habits, moulding our tastes, bending
our character to her own. In the midst of our own drawing
room, in our pet easy chair, we shall see that retiring figure
quietly establish, with downcast eyes and hands busy with their
crochet needles, what Knox called, in days before a higher
knowledge had dawned, “ The Monstrous Regimen of Woman.”
,..... Feminine rule is certainly not favourable to anything like
largeness of mind or breadth of view...... Woman lives from her
childhood in a world of petty details, of minute household and
other cares...... The habit of mind which is formed by these and
similar influences becomes the spirit of the house—a spirit
admirable, no doubt, in many ways, but excessively small. The
quarrels of a woman’s life, her social warfare, her battles about
precedence, her upward progress from set to set, have all on
�24
>
THE EDUCATION OE GIKLS.
them the stamp of Lilliput. But it is to these small details,
these little pleasures, and littie anxieties, and little disappoint
ments, and little ambitions, that a wife generally manages to
bend the temper of her spouse. He gets gradually to share her
indifference to large interests, to broad public questions. He
imbibes little by little the most fatal of all kinds of selfishness—
the selfishness of the home...... Whether from innate narrowness
of mind, or from defective training, or from the excessive
development of the affections, family interests far outweigh in
the feminine estimation any larger national or human consideration...... Justice is a quality unknown to woman, and against
which she wages a fierce battle in the house and in the world.
The first question here is whether the accusations quoted,
or any of them, be true. If not, there is no occasion to
give them a thought; they may be set affde with the easy
supposition that such writers are bachelors, or others,
“ crossed iD love,” and seeking to revenge indiscriminately
upon the sex at large the wrongs, or fancied wrongs, they
have suffered at the hands of individuals. But if, on the
other hand, even growling bachelors and disappointed
voluptuaries have nevertheless a real, solid foundation in
fact for their ungallant observations, the evils they complain
of will not be cured by being shrugged at and hushed up;
on the contrary, the more you whitewash the outside, the
more the inside will fester.
It is not quite accurate to say that a girl can be “ turned
out the exact double ” of another girl; the differences
between characters are as irrepressible as between faces.
Yet, just as the soldiers in a regiment, with all their various
characters, can be drilled into something like uniformity in
working, so can the girls in a house or in a school, and
thence in a larger or smaller circle of society, be drilled
after the pattern of a fixed conventionality, until their life
becomes a tissue of hypocrisy so thorough and so subtle
that it may almost be called conscientious hypocrisy. The
great Oriental maxim of human wisdom is reversed; and
Know not Thyself becomes the rule of polite society, the
basis of good manners, and last, not least, the chevcd de
lataille of that art of arts, that sport of sports, man
catching.
Let women of culture and of independent courage say what
they will for themselves ; I revere—surely I have well
shown how deeply—the bright side of their disposition;
but I am now obliged to treat of the dark one. And I
�THE EDUCATION OE GIRLS.
25
contend that the sway of the False God throughout known
history has so darkened the world with its evil shadow
that the most powerful among female minds now on this
earth can hardly hope to shake it off completely—at least,
I have not met with such an one. Turn to any religion or
to any doctrinal system you please, and the Male is still
practically in the ascendant; can we wonder, then, that lay
society, which voluntarily entrusts its spiritual interests to
the hands of a professional class, should model both its
morals and its fashions after the accepted teaching ?
When it has come to this, that a cultivated writer in a
periodical can state, without provoking the resentment of
all readers, that “ a girl in her teens ” is one of the most
uninteresting objects in the world, we may sit down. The
world, in that case, must be quite topsy-turvy, and the
whole must be less than its part. So it is futile to go any
further with science or philosophy; those useless occupa
tions had better be cast aside ; for the further they go, the
more they will go wrong. If she who is—or was intended
to be—the crown and consummation of nature be among
the most uninteresting objects of nature, it is hard to see
reason for taking an interest in anything. According to this,
it were better to be a mummy than a living and useful
human being. Yet, for all that, is the apparent blasphemy
entirely devoid of foundation ? I fear not.
For example, some time ago I read a series of private
letters addressed to a female relative from an unfortunate
young lady, who had given birth to an illegitimate child,
and had evidently suffered much in mind, if not in body,
before she departed this life a short time after. The letter#
evinced no want of good feeling of a certain sort; they ex
pressed no anger against any one but herself; but here was
just the hitch. I confess that, with all good will to sympa
thise with the girl’s sufferings, I could not help laughing at
these letters, and feeling my sympathies cheated. It was
all such unexceptionable sin, sorrow, and repentance; the
regular old story unaltered. The sin and sorrow were all
done into such correct, angular, book-like phrases; they
were so much in the style of the Perfect Letter-writer, so
unmistakeably the sin and sorrow of a well-drilled Miss,
instead of the unobtrusive grief of a natural, fresh girl; the
Oh !’s and Ah !’s came into their right places with such” a
weary, dreary precision of unbroken common-place; the
�26
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
whole business was so exactly what one has met with over
and over again in penny romances—that the most pathetic
passages in the communications of this accurately-sinning
and accurately-repenting Miss were certainly more provoca
tive of a guffaw than of a sigh. It was the most complete
travestie and burlesque of woe that I ever came across
A. Poor Miss ! You are a very hard-hearted philosopher,
Ish.
I. I hope not; but I freely admit that I hate humbug,
especially second-hand humbug. And especially, to do our
English girls justice, does it sit ill upon them, who have
the sterling heart-of-oak nature hidden beneath all this con
founded rubbish, which would enable them to rise high
above it all, if they chose.
A.' Well, well; continue.
I. The amount of mischief, both to the individual and to
the society whereof the future woman or man is to form a
part, which is done by this systematic early perversion is
not to be estimated—unless, indeed, by forcing ourselves to
contemplate all the misery and wickedness that contact
with the world can reveal. From the horrors of a gigantic
war, with its mangled and agonised bodies, its desolated
and desecrated homes, down to the pettiest domestic trou
bles and quarrels, we may only too safely affirm that early
false impressions respecting good and evil lie at the bottom
of it a.
A. That is an awful impeachment. And I must say, it
seems to me far too much to assume.
I. Treat it as an assumption if you will, but I think you
will find examination bear it out. Let us continue the
examination. The first antagonism between children that
rests on inculcated principle is that of the sexes. This,
therefore, leaves its traces on brothers and sisters perma
nently, while all other differences and quarrels are effaced.
The young girl has been distorted and coerced into a false
appreciation of the other sex from her earliest years of in
telligence ; is she likely to forget the lesson during those
most susceptible years of her life, the years approaching
puberty ? Nay, nay; fidelity to her education, be it good
or bad, is, if any other, a characteristic of the female ; after
you have once spoilt her in early youth, it is very hard—
although I do not say impossible—to un-spoil her after
wards. Very well, then ; the character of the future mis
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
27
tress of the home, as the Saturday Reviewei’ says, is dormant
in the mis-educated, and therefore uninteresting, girl “ in
her teens ” that he sees before him. But to vitiate the
home is to vitiate the world; for the characters, male or
female, which can withstand home influence are few and
far between. And the home influence is polluted thus in
all departments. While the children are very young the
boy is encouraged to be rough and “ manly” in his exploits
under the nursery-table, or among the garden flower-beds,
or in the orchard, while the girl is to be meek and mincing
and “maidenly;” never to wrestle and kick about and
harden her muscles, nor to raise her voice and strengthen
her lungs. And now, when the children are passing out of
childhood, and leaving off extremely childish things, the
same principle is carried on, only that, in addition to pre
vious repression, the girl’s mind, as well as her body, is
attacked by her blind guides, and she is taught to repress
her natural curiosity about sexual relations, which could be
legitimately satisfied with judicious, but thoroughly scien
tific, instruction, analysing the passions, and bringing them
jfcrto subjection to the cultivated intellect; and so she is
forced to think about these things only in that cramped,
unwholesome, morbid, cowardly, and generally idiotic way
in which a polite society or a polite church dares to think
of them. Is it any wonder if a girl in her teens is made
uninteresting? Yet, for all that there is a part of her
which not even this persistent regime of devilry can sup
press : and whoso hath eyes to see it, let him see it.
A. The compliments of the season seem to be flying
about to-day. Would it not be well, perhaps, to ventilate
the matter in a rather more forensic tone ?
I. No ; I doubt if it would. Silver speech is not likely
to be listened to by those with whom I have to deal. Well,
then, again ; to take another point of a girl’s education.
A favourite feminine virtue is supposed to be humility.
But humility towards whom or what? If humility of the
individual human being towards the universal Human
Being were meant, well and good. But then this would
apply even more to man than to woman, since he is only
the indirect form of the Universal One, while she is the
direct form. Or if it were meant to convey that mankind,
children especially, should never be too proud to learn, but
always take to heart a useful hint on any subject, no matter
�28
THE EDUCATION OE GIRLS.
from how obseure a quarter; or if it were meant that we
should be just, even in our quarrels, and never ashamed to
recede from a clearly false position, and to make amends
to the extent of our error—this humility also would be most
commendable- and valuable.
I doubt whether any one
could become a philosopher without it, or indeed attain
real greatness in any walk. So here are two kinds of
humility which I admit to be very desirable in man or
woman. But it is easy to see that the “humility ” incul
cated by priestcraft and its morals is something altogether
different. By this sacerdotal humility, which enslaves the
conscience, beauty is to be humbled to material size and
weight, sweetness to coarseness, intelligence and refinement
to stupidity and brutality, the law of love to that of physical
tyranny among barbarous peoples, and of moral tyranny
among others ; the higher organism is to be humbled to the
lower; and thence by logical necessity—although this is
not admitted—Spirit to Matter, the Creator of the world to
its subordinate forms, Good to Evil.
A. You have a fine talent for making mountains out of
molehills.
I. I thought you said just now that the miseries of this
world were not a molehill, but an awful contemplation.
They are the molehill which the perversion of young girls
has created.
M. Nay, that is just the question.
I. Be it so ; you will tread any other road in vain to
settle the question. But that, of course, can only be finally
decided by your own experience. Meanwhile, pray go and
“ humble ” yourself as the Chair of St. Peter would tell you,
and see whither your “humility” will lead.
M. Well, keep your course again.
I. Not even the excuse of negligenee—a fault to which
we are all more or less prone in our various ways—can be
alleged in defence of the ideas of their mutual duties in
which those responsible cause the young of each sex to
grow up. It will not avail for parents to say, “ Ah, well;
we can’t be at the trouble to bring up our children differ
ently from other people’s children; they must take their
chance.” This kind of shelving the dispute will not hold,
because to take trouble is just what they do, as it happens.
They take enormous pains and trouble, only it is in a wrong
direction. The work, of encouraging the frolics and freaks
�THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS.
29
and gambols and outspokenness of boys, and of snubbing
and strait waistcoating those of girls, is an aggregate of
trouble in itself. Even if the work be shifted altogether to
schoolmasters and mistresses, a sacrifice of money is gene
rally entailed on the parents ; and a few would send their
children off without any inquiries about the place of their
paid-for instruction ; so that in any case a conscious effort
has been made, and its results deliberately calculated upon.
Hence, supposing that utter indifference what becomes of
children were an excuse for allowing them to be perverted,
that indifference is, generally speaking, not a fact, and the
excuse falls to the ground. But, indeed, it is hardly worth
considering; for there are comparatively few children so
isolated from their home as to be out of the way of home
influence on social relations.
Example is a powerful agent in the education of the
young. Any attempt to give them a sound ideal of conduct
is sure to fail, so long as girls and boys hear grown-up
women talking about the inability of ladies to do this or
that, to take long walks, to bear heat or cold, to be out in
the evening damp, to take their part thoroughly in any
game or amusement, in anything that calls for exertion of
body or mind ; and while they hear grown-up men ratifying
and encouraging all this absurd nonsense and delicateladyism, contrasting feminine fragility and good-for-nothingness with their own god-like strength and wisdom. Is it to
be expected that the buds of ideality, coming out in that
imitation of men and women at which all children delight
to play, should take any other form than that of setting up
their men as heroes or villains of unlimited power, and
their women as a set of washy fairies, bound to wait on
their hirsute lords, and do their pleasure ? These things
are not trifles ; for the future character of children is made
even more at play than at work. The same vein runs
through their amusements, whether they be children or
adults. From “ This is the man all tattered and torn, that
kissed the maiden all forlorn, that milked the cow with
the crumpled horn,” &c., up—if, indeed, it be not rather
down than up—to the most fashionable of sensational love
novels, the same light and airy aspect of woman as the
“ forlorn ” dependent of man, awaiting his favour, is pre
sented by a myriad of channels to the imagination of youth.
In the nursery, in the playground at school, at table with
�30
THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS
their elders, at public worship interpreted from the pulpit,
in the entire routine of daily and weekly life, it is the same
old story, the same sophistry and hypocrisy and arrogance
on the one side; the same external cringing acquiescence,
but practical hostility, on the other. On the one side are
developed selfishness and contempt; on the other, servility,
guile, and spite. This is not said at wedding-breakfasts;
but it is, nevertheless, the ugly reality inaugurated there and
everywhere else. And children cannot fail to see it, no,
not more than they can fail to acquire the rudiments of
their mother tongue. It may be wrapped in a silver paper
of plausibilities, but it is a poison whose work is sure.
I hardly need insist longer on the importance of early
impressions ; these have always been recognised, and acted
upon, alas! with only too fatal success by the self-seeking
enemies of light and knowledge. The question before us
is this: has any people in any age ever tried the experiment
of an unprejudiced and unrestrictive education of girls, an
education which, starting with no foregone conclusions
about feminine capacity or duty, seeks rather to find out
what girls can do than to restrain them from doing ? If
not, it is surely time that we should turn and try while
liberty of choice is left. The old religions of the world
have proved themselves to be mostly delusions; the morals
of the world have been something worse; failure has been
stamped upon every undertaking, however grand, to improve
the condition of mankind at large in any degree proportioned
to the sacrifices demanded. But expediency is only one
view of the question, and some might think it the lower
view. There are the requisitions of eternal truth and justice
to be satisfied; and if we who have the task entrusted to us
to perform freely and generously, neglect our duty from
short-sighted motives of whatsoever kind—those laws of
disintegration which are inexorable in reforming the lower
kingdoms of nature, will certainly not be long delayed in
their action upon a community which has shown repeatedly
that it is not fit to work out its destiny for itself.
London: Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Bbadlaugh,
28, Stonecutter Street, E.C.
���
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The education of girls
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 2nd ed.
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 30 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Four essays, mainly in the form of dialogues between "Adam" and "Ish". Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh. Date of publication from British Library. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Dalton, Henry Robert Samuel
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Freethought Publishing Company]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1879]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N184
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The education of girls), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Education of Girls
Suffrage
Women's Emancipation
Women's Rights
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/6ceced6ee8e4975b9a5a02cca1497d4f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=VuEZAOM3O5k5pQCV4WQ6i9E7ntfvLyihIwIdAORPxd8zRy1aQgj2cpWyeHwIoJQZaWDZTVcj5GC5PujttYs7jPMuviBbu4jQO-0ttQn7ci8tQ8Gl6V66ZWKtsfc%7E48Zfk-XrCoJZA6sasfeR9TlzoeZBqLRnafa-K3oEbDKYH0cM1%7E-56bQKvzFqKksKbrD6E4TKwYOVPetchGPVYxzQbMnyETi2FyzVlFzwnbGOinnj5ysCqIkhKK6N-fsYYyZ7inQqzZxqaiGHwXcJ1t%7EfYgk9QzJM52GRkUyMHOH7eSzHkxonhANTIkJNB-PRz5imPGc9HLFBnchNtWIl3cR2iw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
19860e1e392392fe2c6662c14f975b77
PDF Text
Text
e>2^7£
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
ISH’S CHARGE TO WOMEN.
BY
H. R. S. DALTON, B.A.,
AUTHOR OF
“the
education of girls”
AND
“religion and priestcraft.”
LONDON:
FREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28, Stonecutter Street, E.C.
PRICE
FOURPENCE.
�LONDON :•
PRINTED BY ANNIE BESANT AND CHARLES BRADLAUGH,
28, STONECUTTER STREET, E.C.
�PREFACE.
The following extract is the concluding portion of the same
book (second or prose volume) from which the author’s
former pamphlet, “ The Education of Girls,” was taken.
The asterisks mark omission of such passages as would
be likely to give the reader a false impression, when sepa
rated from the main work to which they belong and which
as intended for scholars.
��ISH’S CHARGE TO WOMEN.
I hold that all fundamental reforms must begin at the
foundation, not at the summit. The foundation of a State
is its masses, not its select few. The few may influence
the many to move, but move without them they cannot;
•or, if they do, the new position thus taken up is soon
found inharmonious and untenable. We cannot be just
in our estimation of historic despots, lay or ecclesiastical,
without recognizing the fact that the serfdom of any
people is in the last resort its own fault, after all, or
•at any rate is its own doing. No one can be king or priest
but by consent or submission of the masses over whom he
presides; the mode of bringing about that acquiescence
may be another matter; but there it is in any case, and is
indispensable to the existence of any domination, good or
bad. If you tell me that minds of high quality and culture
•easily lead the sheep-like plebs, as these in their turn govern
■domestic animals by virtue of human understanding—I
reply that the people are not born to be sheep-like, while
the lower animals cannot help being what they are. The
same kind of effort which creates an aristocracy, or the
more powerful aristocracy of talent, would, if exerted, at
least raise the masses to a capacity for self-government in
matters of routine ; so that the idea of a divine right to
govern despotically from above, is as one-sided and unphilosophic as the opposite extreme one, that the masses
■can act without organization. I do not say, mind you, that
the masses are to be expected to originate the ideas which
lead to change ; what I say is that no matter by whom pro
gress has been conceived, it must be executed by the mass
moving voluntarily under leaders, not by leaders trying to
move the unwilling mass.
As, then, little argument is needed to show that woman’s
influence in the home and in social gatherings is already
next to omnipotent in swaying the prejudices both of her
own and of the other sex, I may safely affirm that whatever
�ish’s charge to women.
changes are to be made in the old grooves of thought and'
feeling by the present adult generation—I mean apart from
the boundless resource at hand in a revolutionized training
of the young—must depend for their reality and permanence
on the hearty co-operation, if not the independent will, of
the female community at large. The emancipation of
women must be effected primarily by women themselves.
Since the opponents of woman’s emancipation are sofond of babbling the old ditty that her sphere is the home,
I will take them at their word; not, indeed, to the extent
of admitting that woman’s sphere ought to be anywise
restricted to the home, but to the extent of giving themcarte blanche to exaggerate her power there as they please.
I believe their most dilated expressions about, the sway
of woman’s secret influence will not much overshoot the
mark. And what is more, the men who are most perma
nently affected by it are those of strong character, because
the source of such strength lies in receptivity whereby they
consolidate the results of others’ experience. Hence the
rulers among men being themselves subtly and secretly
guided by women, it may be said with some truth that
women govern the world after all, though they are denied'
any formal acknowledgment of their sway.
How, then, women of our day, do you employ your
powers, such as they are ? I do not so much ask with what
motives you employ them, as with what results. The
motives may be generally conscientious; but are the results
generally beneficial ? What has your influence done toward
improving and ennobling mankind ? Has it produced in
ternational peace and concord ? Has it established internal
content with any people ? Has it removed the injustice of
the contrast between pauperism and wasteful superfluity ?
Has it uniformly discouraged all cruel sports—Spanish bull
fights, for example—wherein helpless- lower animals are the
sufferers ? Has it done anything which might not equally
well have been brought about in due time, had each com
munity consisted only of men ? I fear we shall find it hard
to prove that women have moved en masse toward many—
if, indeed, any—really humanizing events. Good and highminded women there are in abundance, scattered over the
world; but there are also good and high-minded men.
What I seek to discover is something special and peculiar
which has been wrought by women acting in a collective
�ish’s charge to women.
7
capacity; something which shows that, the man-breeding
office apart, this world would not have got on as well with
out them.
I believe we shall have a tremendous revolution; and
then order, the true and Divine Order, will emerge out of
the chaos. But all this does not. and cannot make the
present abuses tolerable; and it is my duty to place them
before you without gloss, however little grace and favour I
may win by so doing.
What are we to conclude from the obvious facts just noted ?
Anything against woman’s untutored nature ? No. The
nature of woman is faultless; it is what women are made
that is corrupt and abominable, amn VJn
nnu>
in Corruptions Heis .? Nay. Her children,
theirs is the spot, perverse and crooked generation that they
are ! Women are capable of everything both for good and
evil; and it is evil that they are mostly reared amidst. And
so far, of course, the fault is not theirs individually; but it
is their fault individually as well as collectively, that when
they are called upon to rise, either by men ' or by other
women possessed of exceptional wisdom, they are deaf to
every appeal that ranges 'higher than petty personalities
which afford occasion for over-reaching and mean jealousy.
Esprit de corps, with the average female, means nothing like
the dignity of the female sex ; it means only the ephemeral
consideration one clique or party may succeed in gaining
over another, to go in its turn to the wall when new favourites
come into fashion. How easily, too, the warmest friendship
between women is cooled and changes into spite when one
of them happens to obtain a little worthless social triumph,
or still more when she wins a race for the condescension of
one of us sons of God ! The dear sweet angelic darling of
yesterday is the nasty detestable creature of to-day, as all
black now as she was all white then. I do not need to be
told that women, like men, must have their occasional
quarrels ; but a fit of anger and even a fierce resentment
prolonged until the cause is removed, are quite different
things from a systematic black envy which is called forth by
the success of a friend, and would rather hinder than helj?
many an acknowledged good work because it is associated
with a particular person and a rival.
In the face of such treachery in the camp, such untrust
worthiness of women in relation to each other, is it any
wonder that the female race has not yet shaken off its
�ISH S CHARGE TO WOMEN.
vassalage? Unity of purpose and of plan is needed to
effect the liberation ; and the only unity that I have observed
consists in a common consent to do nothing that may
efface personal importance for the general good.
I do
not deny that there are exceptions to be found, but they are
as one in a thousand. What, then, is the use of trying to
better those who virtually reply that they do not want to
be bettered? To what purpose is the multitude of philo
sophies and sciences and studies and arts to which many
of you, female friends, equally with us give both reverence
and practical attention, when as an answer to the urgent
representation that study ought, among other things, to
raise you to a position of utility where it will be possible
for your hidden capacities to come forth, you treat what
is said as though such notions were mere jugglers' tours de
force, or curiosities kept in a cupboard to be shown to
visitors and put back again when they have afforded amuse
ment ? For I will challenge any man who has woman’s cause
at heart—and I am thankful to believe that there do exist a
few such men at last—to broach opportunely any depart
ment of this great subject, say at a quiet evening or afternoon
party where there are young ladies to talk to—not some two
or three superior women gathered with difficulty out of the
society of a metropolis, but just chance acquaintances of
the average stamp—and I will ask you to imagine for your
selves what kind of response he will meet with or what
impression he will make. Immediately the strange novelties
of reform are propounded, the girls will glance into his face
to see if he is essaying a sally of humour at which they are
expected to laugh: and finding that he is not, they will
politely compliment him on his chivalrous and liberal feel
ings toward ladies, fancying that this stale old compliment
was what he was fishing for, of course. And then, as soon
as they get an opportunity to change the subject without
rude abruptness, they will lightly laugh it all off, as who
should say, £ Ah, these world-reforming ideas are very
romantic, and gentlemen can make very pretty speeches to
ladies upon them; but of course they wouldn’t do for real
life; we should all be unsexed and lose our chance of a
good match.’ I really do not apprehend having exaggerated
the case; the shallowness of the average young lady’s mind
is something that must be probed to be believed. The pro
cess is not without interest for the curious psychologist; he
need but press her a little toward first principles upon any
�ish’s charge to women.
9
topic whatever, even her favourite one, and he will soon find
that her first principles consist' in some great—or still
better, fashionable—person’s ipse dixit, which it has never
occurred to her to examine, far less to call in question. From
religion downwards—or perhaps I should say upwards
in this case—-the finished young lady does and thinks
almost everything that she does and thinks merely because
some one told her to do so ; and it does not much matter
to her who that some one was. Independent judgment is,
in the first place, beyond her capacity, and in the second,
as indecorous in her opinion as independent action would
be. So there she lives and moves and has her being, a
flaccid automaton of the Proprieties, an Elegant Pheno
menon, from whom both quantity and quality have been
successfully washed out; her very talent, if she has any,
having been trimmed and pared to avoid originality and to
produce indifferent copies of the work of some one with a
name. Such is the description of building we style a young
lady ; and of ladies not young it may be said that the de
parted grandeur of a youth like this leaves traces of its glory
in the midst of their decay.
These are not pleasant contemplations, but they have
to be faced; nor can I halt in the task to be performed
through fear of provoking the enmity of those I would serve.
Yet let not the position be misunderstood. If instead of
what I now see when I look around in the world, I saw women
everywhere awake to their degradation, complaining bitterly
of their moral chains, and striving unanimously to cast
them off, with mean jealousies and petty rivalries for worth
less objects laid aside in presence of that great purpose,
just as the heterogeneous states of a federation waive their
differences in order to withstand a common enemy ; not a
hint would I then have breathed touching their acknow
ledged evils, which I should regard as already put away
by the earnest determination that they shall be. But when,
so far from perceiving such a mind in women, I find them
for the most part indolent and apathetic, and that, not
because their sympathies and interests are absorbed in some
other great problem demanding imperatively a prompt solu
tion, but merely because they find it less troublesome to
bow before idols than to ’ be valiant for any form of truth
upon earth, less irksome to submit to small trials and
feel small pleasures, to live in a sphere altogether small,
than to ennoble themselves by one serious effort; then I
�IO
.
ish’s charge to women.
am bound to say that it is not so much vice or crime which
can drag human nature down to the lowest depths, as this
vile, sneaking, pitiful weakness of character, which amalga
mates only with the worst side of experience, not having
energy to turn adversity to account, to make past pain an
instrument of present wisdom. All things in lower nature
either answer their purpose perfectly as they are, or struggle
onwards in gradual development to its accomplishment.
She alone who is the crown and archetype of nature wilfully
stands in her own light, and perpetuates her own and man’s
misery.
The purpose for which it is dispensed to us to be born
into this world is twofold—the formation of noble character
in the individual, and the furtherance of the race toward
development of the true Humanity, the stature of the fulness
of its own divinity. But . the attainment of either of these
objects of existence depends upon the part assigned to
each being played by each and not- shifted on to someone
else’s shoulders. It is folly, indeed, to refuse to learn from
others, but it is worse than folly never to achieve anything
oneself from which others may learn. He who does the
first may be a self-punishing egoist, but he who defaults in
the second is a cumberer of the ground. To dread being,
original, where originality means production of something
beautiful or useful, is to shun humanity itself; and yet it is
a patent fact that women as a class do systematically hide
under a bushel whatever gifts they possess ; or if they let
them appear, it is with timidity and uncertainty, caused,
not by a doubt whether what they originate be good of its
kind—such hesitation is sometimes desirable—but as to
what people will say, especially the people who lead to-day’s
fashions. There are plenty of brilliant original ideas to be ■
found among women, even as society has made women; but
there is a want of wholeness and consistency and moral
sinew when these ideas come to be definitely put forward,
which completely prevents them from forcing a place for
themselves in the current of actual life. The reason I take
to be that the head and the heart do not work together.
The woman’s heart is always trying to pull her aright; her
poor addled head is always sending her wrong.
Yet, moreover, in speaking thus confidently of the inherent
goodness of woman’s heart, let it be clearly understood that
I mean her innate feelings, not that mess of washy senti-
�ish’s charge TO WOMEN.
II
ments which has been inculcated upon her. These senti
ments only too often follow the lead of the head, and render
the woman to all intents and purposes little better than
heartless....... I assure you this is no ugly phantom of my
own conjuring up; I speak from personal knowledge, from
what I have actually seen of respectable and so-called reli
gious women; and if the majority here can plead not
.guilty to any charge of this sort, I cannot but think that
the chief reason is because they have never been tempted.
Often have I myself known the male as unwilling
to let himself down to the depth of 'feminine heartlessness
as he is unable, on the 'other hand, to. rise to the
heights of feminine goodness; often have I known her
who is bom the Saviour of mankind, and the form of heaven,
trying in vain to eradicate all truthfulness and tenderness
from the heart of him who is born in the opposite character
and form. It. is even so. One woman regards another
Simply as a weed which may be allowed to grow in peace
so long as she herself does not happen to covet its place;
when she does, it is to be torn thence by the root.
*
And
who are these heartless supplanters, once more ? Do they
belong to the “dangerous classes,” are they the companions
■of burglars and garotters ? No; they are the very same per
sons whose lady v. gentleman conduct is in the most un
exceptionable taste, and who, if you were to hint at a more
natural and less selfish and one-sided code of sexual
morality than the ecclesiastical one still in vogue, would dis
play by countenance and gesture the very latest thing out in
■shocked modesty, or perhaps quote an apostle against you.
Their reading of the duty towards one’s neighbour, how
ever, is so far original as to consist in this, that while a
woman who takes a fancy to a man may rightfully lacerate
another woman’s, deepest affections wholesale, and make
the rest of her life miserable, she must, still try to keep up
appearances so far as attainment of the object will allow.
Hearts maybe broken, but Society must not be scandalised.
Think not that I am taking too much upon myself in
■censuring the frailties of others, while I of course have other
frailties of. my own that are doubtless quite as bad in their
way. It is not your frailties, my friends, but rather your
* Dialogist Ish is haranguing a female audience from a platform.
Let us hope that the consciences of most of his hearers would acquit
them of this bitter and sweeping charge.
�ish’s charge to women.
12
fictitious virtues that I inveigh against. I will even go so
far as to say that were it not for these rotten “ virtues ” of
yours, your frailties would have remained mere momentary
impulses, to be overcome the next moment by a better
impulse. If only you had not been made’ such models of
Christian behaviour, it is probable you would have attained
something of real human worth, and the world would have
been a step nearer toward the knowledge of what a woman
can be.
This is no place to recur to the now well ventilated
subject of sensual passions; but I cannot pass on without
saying thus much, that so long as women think it their duty
to cultivate flabbiness and imbecility under the names of
delicacy and innocence, it is really they, the chaste ladies,
who are accountable for whatever morbid abuses of the flesh
may exist in the world.
*
*
*
There are several morbid gratifications which are un
doubtedly injurious; and it is for these, I say, that the whole
race of women is to blame, just in proportion as they
truckle to the depositaries of effete superstition, and submit
to be locked up in the village pound of an ignorant and
corrupt prudery.
Another matter which also makes the few champions of
women’s cause among our sex despair is the puny, febrile,
baseless character of feminine resolution. To adduce an
example : many a good essay or article has of late years
been written in journals' and periodicals by women on
women’s rights and duties ; • productions so able, so graceful
and even scholarlike, so replete with combined sweetness
and strength, as to show clearly how women might, if they
chose, add [in their own persons the divine presence and
influence of womanhood to all those powers that are dis
tinctly human in men. But only let a leading newspaper
or other organ of public opinion print an illogical sour
critique against the newly come forward champion of
woman’s liberty, reproving her in the old set terms and
phrases of conventional pig-headedness, for want of modesty,
&c., &c., and we almost invariably see the hopeful volunteer
“ subside into her boots,” with apologetic explaining away
and deprecation of censure, instead of gladly seizing the
opportunity for an uncompromising and crushing reply.
�ish’s charge to women.
13
What can be done for a class so destitute "of back-bone
that it allows its dearest wishes to be snubbed down by
shallow critics, when it has, after all and in the last resort,
full power to enforce them 2 Want of self-assertion and selfreliance in the face of public prejudice casts a not-altogether
undeserved discredit upon the quieter virtues of kindness
and generosity which women exhibit so largely. A slave’s
virtues cannot be regarded quite as those of a freeman.
They may proceed from spontaneous goodness, but the
world is more likely to set them down as drilled habits or
the results of weakness rather than strength, the products of
compulsion and fear rather - than of love. The courage of
meek endurance may win approbation—especially from the
oppressor, whose interest it suits, of course—but it does not
win the great battles of life; it does not further mankind
toward happiness and unity. On the contrary, were there
no other virtues in the world than those which fashion
stamps as the Frauen-Zimmer virtues, the ornamental
qualities of the lady’s bower—the state of modern society,
bad as it is already, would then be far worse. Abject
superstition overhead; narrow selfishness around, broken
only by occasional idolatry of some favourite, the roc’s egg
of the season; thorns and briars of evil temper and suspi
cion and spiteful envy and hollow artifice and mean motives
and “ whatsoever loveth and maketh a lie,” besetting every
path underfoot—all that is noble and aspiring and progres
sive in these hard days of ours would be eliminated from
life, and the peace of hell which hateth all understanding
would have to be purchased by each one of us at the price
of degradation to be helpless sloths or murderous reptiles
before our time.
Another among the evil consequences of a false standard
of honour set up in female society is the vulgar snobbish
emulation of each class of social rank by that one just below
it in the scale. Women, having been educated to frivolity,
can seldom look upon works of any kind as honourable in
themselves. . They regard them as mere stepping-stones to
personal distinction and social consideration, as instruments
of mammon worship, to be cast aside when done with and
to be kept as much in the background as possible while
they are being used. Hence they do not care to excel in
their several stations, but each must needs trespass on the
station next above. For example, the maid-servant, having
�14
ish’s charge to women.
no conception of any more solid mental pleasure, stints
herself in the necessaries of health in order to buy a smart
bonnet or cloak and make herself look as much of a “lady”
as possible on Sundays and other holidays; often the un
becoming ill-assorted finery is a direct though bad imitation
of something worn by her own mistress. Of course she has
as much right to her own tastes as the mistress herself; but
that is no reason why either should be frivolous. Then
look at the mistress whom she apes. Probably she is a
lady properly so called, but of 'inconsiderable fortune and
therefore not justified in attempting the display, whether in
dress or other matters, which her neighbour the nobleman’s
wife or large proprietress can make without sacrifice. But
she must needs in her turn ape her titled or opulent neigh
bour and live at agony point in order to keep up a style
which may make her seem to hold a different position from
that she really does. And so on with each class in its way;
each resolves on seeming what it is not; and so long as
women act thus, is it to be expected that men should keep
themselves free from the taint ? Snobbishness, vulgarity,
hollowness, heartlessness, whatever is greasy and unclean in
polished morals will always remain prominent characteristics
of our civilization, so long as our women have no worthier
ambition than that of ephemeral peacock rivalry—a rivalry
in which the successful competitor gains little that is real,
except the spiteful envy and back-biting of the dear
sisters she has outstripped in the discreditable race. I fear
too that the women of England are more to blame than any
others for the spreading of this social ulcer. However it
may suit foreigners to have their jokes against England
about this or that, it is none the less a fact patent enough to
any one who will take the trouble to observe, that this
country exercises a deeper influence upon the ideas of the
epoch than any other in the world. This is not the place—
nor do I profess to be historian or anthropologist enough—
to inquire why it is so. What is more to the purpose is to
ask whether we whose example is secretly so powerful
abroad are taking care that that example shall be a good
one. Are we endeavouring honestly to colonize the lands,
so far as we may, with justice and truthfulness and
humanity ? Perhaps we are; but what success is the
endeavour likely to have, while the very source of justice
and rectitude and fellow-feeling remains by our own consent
and act a poisoned spring ? Bear this in mind, my
�ish’s charge to women.
1-5
countrywomen: it is not merely the house or village or town
you each inhabit, not merely your own small fidgeting and
discontented circle, that suffers by your studied falsification
of the name and nature of Woman ; there is a great world
outsideTupon which your lives collectively and individually
work with occult but immense effect; and you are each
responsible to a far greater extent than you have any notion
of for the happiness or misery of entire mankind. • If, then,
you would not shrink from the task you are born into this
world to fulfil, you must alter your course and cast aside your
shams, though it be pain and grief to you; aye even if those
shams constitute the whole of your present religion and
nearly half of your present morality.
I would not, my hearers, that you should think I am too
swayed by passion to form a just judgment on these
matters. Nor am I conscious of ingratitude to the Past; I
do not forget that what is worn out and worse than useless
now, was once justly hailed as a deliverance and a blessing.
But I do refuse to admit the doctrine that expedients which
were good for a bye-gone age should necessarily hold good
for the present age. For instance, both Christianity and
Christian marriage have had their day. The Christian form
of hero-worship was a step in the direction of anthropomor
phism from the negative Judaism which was its immediate
predecessor; and as regards old heathendom, Christianity
was better than creeds which sanctioned human sacrifice and
torture. And Christian marriage, no doubt, came as a boon
to .races of women liable to be bought and sold by the
drove. But those times are gone, and we need not continue
to apply the remedies which belonged to them; if we do,
they become injuries instead of remedies, like a course of
medicine which is still persisted in after its work in the body
has long been done. Let us render the Past all the thanks
due to it, and then bow it out of the door. We do not
want it or its morals any longer; we are entering upon a
different dispensation. We are getting up from all-fours
upon our feet, and intend to walk without external props.
We require no St. This or St. That to tell us our duty or
supply us with canons of faith; the night of authority is past,
the sunrise of rational liberty is at hand; the ungrown
nations are beginning to foretaste their manhood, and they
will not longer submit to be tied with the leading-strings of
tradition. Let those who would so tie them beware ; they
�*6
ish’s charge to women.
make the attempt at their peril. An irreversible fiat has
gone forth against the old order of things. Delenda est
Carthago.
It rests with you, women of our generation, to overcome
the insanity of being ruled by a nightmare. You alone can
remove the dreamy incubus of these false and hollow morals
which have pinched and worried the masses of mankind
until crime and cruelty became the inevitable outlets of
suppressed heat; it rests with you to say,. Let there be light;
and the rays of liberty shall dart into every gloomy abode of
scowling hatred and murderous violence and pining misery,
turning the blackness of darkness into rainbow colours, and
the poisonous reek of disease into the zephyr of rejuve
nescent health. The philanthropists of centuries have
essayed in vain what you can accomplish in a few years if
you will; great men here and there have educated them
selves by long and painful ordeals, and when their steel
has been tempered at last, they have, in their own persons,
withstood the pressure and shocks of the current, and have
persuaded a sprinkling of lesser minds to stand by them as
against it; but you have the power, if you choose, to turn
the course of the current itself, so that vice will become
difficult and virtue easy, not indeed in the distorted sense
hitherto borne by those terms, but when virtue shall have
come to mean something that benefits oneself and others,
and vice the deliberate preference of morbid excitement to
sound and healthful' pleasures at hand. For, indeed, as
things are yet, it may really be a question whether “virtue ”
is not, on the whole, a rather worse evil than vice. It rests
with you, I say, to look back shortly from a position of dignity
and beneficence upon these grey cold days through which we
are passing, with a shudder at your former infatuation. Ele
vated to the divine throne, your birthplace, in matters spiritual,
and set free to live instead of vegetating and wasting away mil
dewed, in matters mundane—you will then, for the first
time in history, become sensible that a woman ought not to
be merely a well-dressed female biped; that she exists for
something more than to make a little show and a little fuss
in a little place and then vanish.
Strike with a will, and you will soon find out the strength
of your arm. You will soon find out what a pitiful weapon
the alleged superior strength of men is against the fixed
determination of woman to conquer by the power of sexual
�ISH S CHARGE TO WOMEN.
17
fascination J I mean, plainly, to reward those who will stand
by and advance her social and other rights, and punish all
those who oppose them, no matter how they stand related.
*
It is useless to disguise the fact that women can and must
enforce their rights. To trust in the generosity of the essen
tially selfish is like waiting for the sun to rise in the west;
those who will have to be deposed for woman’s elevation
are not likely to yield but under compulsion. The day for
that hope has passed; the crisis of your destiny is at hand,
•and the reserve must be called up.
Thus you see, women of every stage and station in life,
it is to your better nature and your higher faculties that I
would appeal in order to awaken you to a sense of the
. evils you are fostering and to the ready modes of putting an
end to them. But it is also my duty to show, that if you
are determined to “keep the universal track which vain
persons have trodden,”+ vain will be found those tinsel de
fences of yours on which you rely for the conservation of a
tinsel society; your narrow prudishness, your regulated
■coyness, your paste-board dignity—not too dignified, how
ever, to stoop to any meanness—your stereotyped recipes
for-catching- eligible men in matrimonial toils, your creed
that marriage is a woman’s stimmum bonum to which she is
to sacrifice every sound quality with which she was born ;
vain, I repeat, will be these old bulwarks against the iron
mis,sites ready to be hurled at them, when the victims of long
imposture shall have found out the worthlessness of those
ia whose hard service they have groaned with unrewarded
patience, and shall have risen like one man to shatter their
chains and grind the forgers of them in the dust. You
■cannot win in such a struggle, but you can by thus taking
the wrong side aggravate all the miseries it may engender.
It is, then, a practical question, female friends, which you
at this day called upon to determine—no mere philosophic
■Speculation like the Sexual Symbol Theory, for example—
but a vital matter which concerns this world rather than the
■Other, at all events, in the first and foremost place. You
* This, of course, applies only to vindicating the rights of the female
The Dialogist does not mean that women would be
justified in making the home unhappy for the sake of any mere
private personal whim.
sex at large.
f jib* »nn 10m note ninon
[Job xxii., 15.]
dSv
nnstn
�13
ish’s charge to women.
have to choose between two positions for your sex at large,
and so for your individual selves as members of it, either of
which positions wholly excludes the other.
By the one you will be emancipated from the long term
of bondage which has dwarfed your minds and enervated
your constitutions ; you will be made to feel an independent
dignity instead of the menial one of belonging to a husband
—in theory at any rate—as a dog or horse might belong to
you; you will take your equal share in that humanizing
sense of responsibility which the holding a worthy office in
the human commonwealth and in that of your own country
begets; you will know what freedom means, that it is poor
freedom to be physically at large without having the soul
free from influences of superstition more imperious and
wayward and hurtful than any tyrant’s commands; and -in
this true freedom you will lift your heads up and away from
gazing upon the footprints of some historic hero and expect
ing the empty shadow of his name to support you in the
inevitable trials of life. You will become conscious of a
power for good over all the departments of human—aye of
animal—existence, very different from maudlin sentiment
and impotent benevolence that wishes well but does nothing.
You will see before you definite objects of a worthy ambi
tion, which your own talents and energies may win without
fear of being thwarted by bad laws and worse customs
established by men in their selfishness as against you. It
will be yours to command wars to cease in all the world,
and nations to adjust their differences by arbitration, so that
the miseries of wholesale maiming and bloodshed shall be
counted among the horrors of vanished night; and crime
under your wiser administration shall be reduced at all
events from being an organized system into an occasional
result of temporary passion. Above all, in this new posi
tion, your rightful place, you will be the recognized home
and source of each nobler human aspiration, and everything
great and good and beautiful that the whole world contains,
will be valued and admired in its relation to you. Your
special pleasures will no longer be confounded with mere
animal wants or with the coarseness of profane revelry•
they will be understood as constituting that Holy Place
which nothing unclean may come nigh. Thus known asthe prime source and final end of every keen physical
delight and the one worthy object of every sublime ideal
ecstasy, at the same time the'never-failing help and comfort
�ish’s charge to women.
19.
in what sorrow and-darkness may still remain—the king
doms of this world will have become the kingdoms of your
mercy and truth meeting together, your righteousness and
peace kissing each other. As the waters cover the sea,,
so will your knowledge cover the earth, its Saviour and
Love and Life.
Turn now to the other side, the alternative position.
According to this you will indolently suffer things to go on
as they are, even if you do not actively strive to keep them
so. As a matter of fact, you1 are no more able to prevent
the great final consummation, the “ one far off divine event
to which the whole creation moves,” and which consists in
*
the liberation and elevation of your sex, than you can stop
the next comet. But it is easy to conjecture what disastrous
results will accrue to yourselves in the meanwhile, if you
persist in suffering for a bad cause through moral cowardice
or perverse obstinacy. You will forfeit the good opinion of
those whose admiration you evidently value more than selfrespect ; their affections and esteem being transferred to
that class whon| you make outcasts and despise. You will
bring honesty and honour into discredit by showing that
they who clamour for those principles are themselves hollow
and vain; and narrow self-seeking will through your fault
reconimend itself as the only safe rule for the conduct of
life. You will give a. colouring of justice to the brutalities
brutal men commit against their wives or other women, if
they say, “ It’s all very well to preach about conduct to
women; but you’ll find, sir, if you try it, that to be kind to
a woman is only to feed a snake to bite you.”' By conde
scending to fight man, where you must or wish to fight him,
with weapons more ignoble than his own, you will still
insure, as you have hitherto done, the easy victory of his;
worse nature over his better and itsyet more easy victory over
you. . By your contrivance the name of “ old woman” will
remain the contemptuous epithet it always has been, and
that of young woman will only fare better because of the
sensual gratifications attached to youth, sensual gratifica
tions having no more of the spiritual in them, if so much,
as the coition of beasts of the field. By this perversity of'
yours, misunderstanding, the cause of so much otherwise
causeless hatred, will be perpetuated in the world, there
being no common ground for the sympathy of diverse
religions, philosophies and ethics ; so that no new light will.
�20
ISHS CHARGE TO WOMEN.
■ever be able to appear as light to all, nor will aught be meat
for one soul without being poison for others ; conflict, con
flict everywhere will be the normal state of the inhabitants
of the earth, there being no judge to set the opponents
right. Your rule will not be a rule of right, but of cunning
inspired by malignity against each other; and it will be con
stantly over-ruled by the decision of men whom you gra
tuitously make judges in their own cause. Discontent,
beginning in your own hearts and homes, will grow louder
and louder as it pervades all classes and expresses itself in
various forms of unreason and disorder, until all are ready
for an outbreak which will inundate the privileges of classes,
and necessitate a painful reconstruction of society from its
slowly settling foundations. Thus at every turn scorn and
contumely will meet you; the God of your faith will prove
a liar, and the men you idolize will sneer at you and turn to
those other women whom you set at naught. Heavenly aid
a mockery, and trust in man a disappointment, there will
remain for you no refuge but the hell of your own concoct
ing, where womanhood and manhood melt away alike.
tK-
Rouse yourselves, then, women, from your criminal supine
ness, and take your destiny into your own hands, and be
truly women and not “ dumb driven cattle ” without the
cattle’s good qualities. The time is ripe for your united
action ; action that is not united may accomplish a little, but
not what the exigencies of the case demand. Make common
cause for the assertion of your rights social, political, pro
fessional, and religious; if assertion be not sufficient to
obtain them, make common cause for coercion in that way
you can coerce. Try and look at the matter seriously and
■act in it seriously ; do not treat it as a new sensation, which
is to have a season’s run and be done with, lest haply the
next great season’s sensation be one you will not like at all.
Strive, above all things, to cast that slough of yours, that
worst and most hideous part of undeveloped feminine
■character, your mutual jealousy and envy. When men are
�ish’s charge TO WOMEN.
21
jealous of each other—well, they are fools for their pains
*
and that is ail; having no unborrowed spiritual worth, they
cannot throw such away by misconduct. But you who have
and are the very spiritual gold, and yet tarnish it by thwart
ing and hating one another, especially when you do this in
reference to rivalry for the admiration of some particular
man or men, are guilty of profaning the Sanctuary itself, so
that they who approach it in order to be cleansed become
but doubly defiled.
Rouse yourselves and doubt not your capacity to work
OUt your own perfect regeneration and ours. The evidences,
of your capacity are plentiful, and are daily increasing, as a
Slightly more liberal education brings them out. No candid
observer can fail to remark how, when a woman does take
Up a thing in good earnest, she accomplishes it with a
finish &nd grace unattainable by men, though her work may
as yet lack that weight and depth which a man derives
from his advantageous mental training both of private study
and of public association.
This training, then, is one of the things you have to
insist upon, my friends, if you would choose the upward
path ; and there is now no middle course between going up
and going down. The age is in a transition state; old land
marks are crumbling away, and new ones are not yet set up;
the mariner has lost his former chart, and another is not
-provided for him; the light in the compass binnacle hasgone out, and there is no pilot across the waves of this
troublesome world. The portents of the latter day come
thick upon us in the ever louder refusal on all sides to bow
to the old ipse dixits ; the spirit of independence is breaking
out violently, and is only here and there moderated by
breadth of view. International associations, trade unions,,
strikes, democratic forces of every kind, reasonable and
unreasonable, are surging to the front; and though with
Anglo-Saxon peoples they may rarely lead to serious riotsz
their operation is all the more sure for being comparatively
Steady and quiet. The so-called conservative section of
society has not its heart in the defence of that which it
defends; while the opposite party is not exactly certain what
it is clamouring for, but would rather “ go it blind ” in the
direction of any smash than stifle and stagnate longer under
our fathers’ regime.
Yours, women, yours alone is the healing hand that can
allay all this fermentation ; not, indeed, in the way of arrest-
�22
xsh’s charge to women.
ing the great changes that are to come about, but so as to
prevent animosity and injustice between the classes affected
by them, and all classes must be affected in their turn.
Learning, in the first place, to look upon each other with
different eyes from what has hitherto been, your first thought
will not be that of shining at each other’s expense, but of
.grouping together to form a beautiful and efficient whole.
Here—in the mutual love of women—may be realised the
enjoyment of passions neither degrading nor defiling. It
may be, however, that no such stimulant is needed to awaken
women to a sense of their mutual obligation ; and in any
-case when once they are awakened, the keen wits heretofore
so sharp to create and foster unworthy class jealousies and
estrangement, will be as ready and able to cement cordiality
•and good understanding. Classes will not revile one another
when each and all have felt the sweet feminine influence
from each; bitterness will be short-lived as the hoar-frost
melting before the morning sun. By the advent of woman’s
reign on earth as in heaven will then be realised what a
■contemporary poet has made the answer of Liberty—
“ Liberty ! what of the night ?
I feel not the red rains fall;
Hear not the tempest at all,
Nor thunder in heaven any more :
All the distance is white
With the soundless feet of the sun ;
Night, with the woes that it wore
Night is over and done.”*
The time for that great change is coming near, and those
who refuse to join in the movement once fairly afoot, will
dimply be swept away by it. They will have to go in the
same direction after all, only with a bad grace and without
'claim for consideration.
They will be self-appointed
martyrs in an utterly thankless cause, that can neither
•defend the ramparts of the past nor lay any foundation for
the future. They will lose what they have and receive
nothing ’in its stead, or nothing which they are able to
appreciate. Ambition with them having proved a delu
sion and affection become a smouldering ruin, their latterday judge will be their own heart, and one to pronounce
their doom.
Women, can you hesitate between these opposite courses,
* Swinburne’s “ Songs before Sunrise.”
“ A Watch in the Night.”
�ish’s charge to women.
23
the upward and the downward path ? The voice of the age
is rising loud around you, the looks of the age are growing
fixed upon you ; the decisive hour of your .destiny is striking,
and il it is a knell which summons you to heaven or hell.”
By all you hold most dear in this life and all you most hope
for in worlds to come; by the loves you trust to continue,
the griefs you wait to put away; by the noble ambitions,
the refined tastes, the pure and properly human joys you
would develop instead of losing ; by everything which now
or hereafter may constitute the happiness of you and yours
-out of the deep we call to you to obliterate the disgrace
of your woeful past, and no more to let the name of your
-sex be a jeer in the mouths of thoughtless men, a bye-word
for what is weak and pitiful. You and you alone by your
-energy—your combined energy, undistracted by mean jea
lousies of each other—can at once make this world better
•and happier than it is, and can raise us all to a clearer
insight and a firmer faith respecting what is to follow. On
the other hand, you and yo.u alone will be the responsible
authors of greater anguish than mankind has yet endured,
if you continue to prostitute yourselves to falsehood and its
votaries, and idly fold your saving hands, and while cower
ing before the ills which your own apathy keeps alive, list
lessly repeat silly commonplaces to the effect of saying,
Peace, peace, when there is no peace.'
Choose ye this day whom ye will serve ; the God whose
•express image ye are, and who in your persons only can be
worshipped and loved; or that vain deluded “world ” which
has no personality but yet enough reality to continue what
it has ever, been, the means of your distortion and degrada
tion and bitter wrongs and woe.
&
-5^
^4.
There shall be quiet and safety for evermore among all
the inhabitants of the earth, when she who is born’ their
perfection and crown, their God and Giver of Life/ their
Comforter, shall come to the knowledge of herself and her
power, and shall arise and cast aside these unclean graveclothes under whose weight she has lain so long. In that
sunrise of everlasting peace shall the night of woe and dis
cord be remembered.no more; nation shall not rise up
against nation, nor kingdom against kingdom; they shall
not waste their precious substance any more in preparation
for misery and blood.
They shall not call bloodshed
glory, nor make trophies of their fellow-creatures’ pain, nor
�24
ish’s charge to women.
be thoughtless and cruel toward the creatures below, as.
though these, forsooth, had no kinship with us, no feelings
as keen as ours. The sweet Holy Spirit of Woman, the
Risen Saviour, shall lighten all dark and noisome corners,
of existence with such rays as it has nowhere yet shed. As
for the old false gods with their fiendish creeds, they shall
be as forgotten filth by the wayside; and the True God
nigh, in recognition of Herself, shall never again stoop,
down to that reeking refuse, nor look away from her own
sex for the joys of heaven.
Acknowledged universally as the physician of- body and
mind, their chief refuge and stay in trouble, their sole object
of worship in health; as the only confessor to whom theheart’s secrets may be laid bare, and in whose hand is theonly power to absolve; as the healer and purifier and sanc
tifier, the dispenser of blessings and author of good, the
rewarder of virtue and talent; as the main theme of science
and philosophy, the final aim of art’s highest ideals; as the
source, end and eternal paragon of wisdom, beauty and love
—to her alone shall belong all praise, might, majesty,,
dominion and glory, in all worlds for ever and ever.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Ish's charge to women
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Dalton, Henry Robert Samuel
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 24 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "The following extract is the concluding portion of the same book (second or prose volume) from which the author's former pamphlet "The education of girls" was taken."--Preface. Date of publication from KVK. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Freethought Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1878]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N185
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Ish's charge to women), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
NSS
Women
Women-Education-Great Britain
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/25694c3645abf7e827c5d02f2cc4b099.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ZAaw%7E%7Ef0cAeWub0K-jdwT5DIWzJvaoigh7HSHh--l7zd%7E4yG7bR9aEWmu9aboINULhRIGGTx4cmevHFFjth0ZjQ8TmNzkg%7EEXS5wiOM0YLLpUxnlHLZD8OR%7EcpfGMVH9pTyVYAKnEKdXoiJPwwUtq0O0V91NDb-BunnHPXvVy3EHfWNvS2VS0b3TSWUrkOJg8y1zEHAO4-Io0AuIE0k6GKIM0dOQqpbeqMoegHCPN7kj16tqUfyHmQarq6RQVuwuDYPxIjGv0Wb50X7R1mDiaoCDplYkQmaq5k0iPjmvSZxrP2YzX2MPVXG7BubUIbTPaF34axMi0eV78HXeb6JZ1w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a0f7cba0cdf5dff3905ded837bf4c02e
PDF Text
Text
�Margate.
Dear Gertrude,—
As you press me so earnestly, to tell you my thoughts
on religious and social questions, and as I think that some
of my ideas may console you in your deep, deep sorrow, and
even prove to you, perhaps, the source of returning joy and
strength, I will endeavour, as I best can, to comply with
your request. The task you have set me will be a delightful
one, I assure you, probably not only enabling me to see
more clearly what is at present but dim and shadowy, but,
perchance, opening the way to more light beyond; for the
logical expression of our ideas conducts ever to new ideas, as
the Seen is ever suggestive of the Unseen.
First among your inquiries is, what do I think of Mar
riage ? Do I believe it to be a great spiritual and eternal
reality, or merely a conventional contract, which death puts
an end to and the civil law can annul ?
t
“ Who would not see bridal rose
In the angel gardens ope ?
Who would not love deathlessly ?
Love is long,
Love is strong,
Heaven is Love’s eternity;
Love is wise,
Walks the skies,
Beautiful immortally.”
Dearest Gertrude, from my earliest girlhood I have ever
clung to the belief—wild, shadowy, and incomprehensible as
�6
it long appeared to me—that marriage is a spiritual reality,
a joy and a blessedness for ever.
But before proceeding further on this point, let me tell
you my thoughts of God, of the human soul, and of the
relationship which exists between them.
To borrow the expressions of Swedenborg, I conceive the
soul to consist of, as it were, two organs—“ the will ” and
“ the understanding ”—organs constantly in reception of
sentiments and ideas : of selfish sentiments and their corre
sponding erroneous ideas, arising upwards out of our animal
nature; and of disinterested sentiments and their corre
sponding true ideas, flowing in upon us from above, even
from the infinite love and the infinite intelligence of the
motherhood and the fatherhood of God.
God is the only being ; the soul is but a form, receptive
of divinity, and capable, through virtuous action, of rising
upwards, and ever upwards, through beatitude, towards the
eternally Unapproachable and Inexhaustible. God is the only
being. All spiritual creatures may be wise and loving, but
God alone is love and wisdom; all spiritual creatures may
be beautiful, but God alone is beauty. Oh I what is beauty?
Is it an existence or but a name ? It is the harmony of love
and wisdom. It is the marriage of God. It is the veil
before the Holy of Holies. It is the blissful medium of
Divinity for evolving love and light to angel and to man.
“ Such harmony is in immortal souls;
But whilst this muddy vesture of decay
Doth grossly close it in, we cannot hear it,”
I have often spoken to you, dear Gertrude, of what I con
ceived to be the triune nature of God ; but a deeper study
of the subject has illumed and rearranged my views. Let
�7
me, therefore, explain, that although I am conscious, as for
merly, of three distinct yet inseparable sentiments and ideas
—the sentiment and idea of the good, the sentiment and idea
of the beautiful, and the sentiment and idea of the true—I
now perceive the sentiment and idea of the good, and the
sentiment and idea of the true, to be sentiments and ideas of
two divine elements or first principles of the one existence—
God; while the sentiment and idea of the beautiful I
perceive to be a sentiment and idea, not of a third divine
element or first principle, but of the Divine Marriage, or
eternal inseparability of divine goodness and divine truth;
as effect to cause, as ideal to real, so is beauty to love and
wisdom, even “ the only begotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth.”
As to my ideas respecting Society—the relationship of man
to man—I find it most reasonable to believe there was but
one primal pair, as in this case the whole human race is indis
solubly linked together by the adamantine chains of consan
guinity and spiritual affinity, whose omnipotent influences
in the glorious future which, by the grace of Heaven, we
will win, will be most loyally asserted.
And as regards marriage, by which I would express the
spiritual union of one to one, and of one to one only and for
ever, conceiving it, as I do, to be a fact in God, I hold it to
be a fact also in every human soul. But, apart from argu
ments educed from the conception of marriage as a divine
feet, if God created but one man and one woman, does it not
follow indisputably that not only is one husband or wife at
a time of divine appointment, but that one husband or wife
ever is of divine appointment also ? For in case of the death
of either of our first parents, with whom could either of them
have been conjugally united, no one being in existence but
�their own children ? And, further, if God created hut one
man and one woman, does it seem at all unreasonable to
believe that for each man and each woman throughout
the world there is one divinely-ordained marriage, which true
love should seek after, and having once found should cherish
inviolate for ever ?
a No one is so accursed by fate,
No one so utterly desolate,
But some heart, though unknown,
Responds unto his own.
Responds as if, with unseen wings,
An angel touched its quivering strings;
And whispers, in its song,
‘Where hast thou stayed so long
As regards the spirituality, the divine guarantee of the
eternity of marriage, I believe woman to be the primal reci
pient of divine love, man of divine intelligence, and that the
celestial and eternal marriage which all should aspire after,
and which, when universal, will banish sorrow and suffering
from the earth for ever, consists in the ceaseless blending
and reciprocating between man and woman of these constant
inundations from on high.
I believe divine love and divine intelligence to be indis
soluble—that where one is not the other cannot be; so that
only in the degree that each woman opens her heart, or, in
other words, subdues hei’ will, to the celestial influences of
divine love, or to the holy spirit of disinterestedness, can an
irradiance of divine intelligence penetrate and illuminate the
understanding of him who is spiritually and eternally her
divinely-affianced husband, and through whose error-enfran
chised intellect is to emanate that supernal “ knowledge
�9
which is the wing on which together they shall soar
to God!”
Swayed by the scriptural assertion that “ in heaven there
is neither marriage nor giving in marriage,” there are those
who deny emphatically the sex of soul.
But imagine the recognition of two sexless souls beyond
the grave, who on this side had been man and woman. To
the soul who had been man how contemptible for past effemi
nacy must appear the soul who had been woman ; and to the
soul who had been woman how revolting for past masculinity
must appear the soul who had been man. But admit the
spirituality, and consequently the immortality, of sex, and,
lo ! where contempt would be, there is love ; where revolt,
worship!
Oh! who would relinquish for immortality the charming
contrast of sex ? Who would barter for heaven the bliss it
inspires ? Hear Milton sing a song of Eve’s in Paradise :—
‘ Sweet is the breath of Morn, her rising sweet,
With charm of earliest birds ; pleasant the sun,
When first on this delightful land he spreads
His orient beams on herb, tree, fruit, and flower
Glistening with dew; fragrant the fertile earth
After soft showers; and sweet the coming on
Of grateful evening mild; then silent night,
With this her solemn bird, and this fair moon,
And those the gems of Heaven, her starry train :
But neither breath of morn, when she ascends
With charm of earliest birds; nor rising sun
On this delightful land; nor herb, fruit, flower
Glistening with dew; nor fragrance after showers;
Nor grateful evening mild; nor silent night,
With this her solemn bird ; nor walk by moon
Or glittering starlight, without Thee, is sweet.”
�10
Oh! no; it cannot be that sex is carnal only; it is of the
soul; not only is it human, but divine. And before its spi
rituality its carnality must wane, until divine love and divine
intelligence, its eternal prototypes, in harmonic affiance
throughout the spiritualised humanity of our sphere, shall
be its only sign “ on earth, as it is in heavenor, in the
language of the poet,—
“ ’Till oft converse with heavenly habitants,
Begin to cast a beam on the outward shape,
The unpolluted temple of the mind,
And turn it by degrees to the soul’s essence,
Till all be made immortal. If this fail,
The pillared firmament is rottenness,
And earth’s base built on stubble.”
Thus, you see, my dear Gertrude, how fully I must sym
pathise with all the deep affection of your true, womanly
nature; and how unwavering must be my faith, that yom'
mourning will ultimately be turned into joy. But even whilst
sorrow weighs upon you it is not altogether uncompensated,
filling a heart so true and pure as yours, for what says one
of our favourite poets ?—
“ Would’st thou see through the riddle of being
Further than others can ?
Sorrow shall give thine eyes new lustre
To simplify the plan.
And love of God and thy kind shall aid thee
To end what it began.
To Love and Sorrow all Nature speaketh ;
If the riddle be read,
They the best can see through darkness
Each divergent thread
Of its mazy texture, and discover
Whence the ravel spread.
�11
Love and sorrow are sympathetic
With the earth and skies;
Their touch from the harp of Nature hringeth
The hidden melodies.
To them the eternal cords for ever
Vibrate in harmonies! ”
But to return to my theme.
It. is still considered anopen question,I believe,concerning
free will and necessity. Now, according to my views, as you
may have perceived, all that can be said for free will is true
as regards woman, and all that can be said for necessity is
true as regards man. So there may be more allegorical truth
than Theists have been inclined to admit in the tale about
Eve and the apple. And does it not account altogether for
the seeming injustice current in the world of allowing the
immorality of man to pass with less censure than that of
woman ?
Unless admitting the pre-eminence of woman to man in
the matter of freedom of volition, she must be acknowledged
Becidedly his inferior, for he is undoubtedly her equal in
affection, and in intellect how incomparably her superior I
To all those women who know what it is really to love
there is nothing dissonant to their nature in admitting their
inferiority to those they love ; for, spiritually, their attitude
is one of worship and total abnegation of self. But in the
light of reason God is just, and He would not have created a
being physically and mentally so helpless as is woman in the
presence of man, without having endowed her with an inward
strength, a power which, in the presence of her consort, should
be her safeguard when in the right, and which would only
abandon her to his oppression or to his righteous displeasure
when in the wrong.
�12
All this being true, as I feel so very sure it is, what a
responsibility rests upon our sex—a responsibility which is at
once our glory and our shame I
In deepest sorrow and humiliation for all the evil our
unworthiness has wrought, may we evermore ceaselessly
aspire after those celestial influences whose immaculate pre
sence within our hearts will cause the dayspring of divine
truth to arise upon our race, kindling it into angelic loveliness,
and making earth scintillate with more than Eden’s beauty,
making it resonant of more than Eden’s ecstatic joy 1
“ Order is Heaven’s first law.”
I hold the order of humanity to be dual, in correspondence
with divine love and divine wisdom, the two first principles
or elements of Deity.
I, therefore, believe our First Mother to have given birth
to two sons and two daughters, and, as the incontrovertible
fact, that, through a necessity caused by God, brother
wedded sister, in the family of our first parents, proves
beyond the shadow of a doubt, that such marriage was
the holy one, the immaculate, and the true: I further
believe the immaculate marriage relationship to have been
marked by the divinely affianced wife and husband having
been twins.
Ilad man not fallen, these divinely-ordainedi
relationships would have been enduring, each pair at
divinely-appointed seasons giving existence to two pairs, in
immaculate and symmetrical succession.
What harmonic families, communities, and nationalities
unfurling everlastingly, individually, and collectively, and
generation after generation bearing aloft the immortal
banner of the divine duality in unity—the God-given symbol ■
of the beautiful, eternally emerging from and evolving the
�13
good and the true ! But man did fall; spirituality waned ;
the fabled serpent, sensuality, gained the ascendant, and
the divine marriage was violated—its laws desecrated and
forgotten—-until eventually all trace of it was lost amid the
discord, confusion, and chaos that ensued, and which
remains, alas! until this day.
But, dear, dear Gertrude, though desecrated, violated,
and forgotten, this marriage spiritually exists ; though pro
faned, it may become reconsecrated ; though lost, it may be
found ! Priests cannot make it; the law cannot annul it;
God alone is its author, and on His eternity doth it rest.
Must not Bessie Raynor Parkes have had a deep though
transient feeling of much of this when she wrote the
following lines, in her beautiful poem of “ Gabriel ”?
aDeep within my heart it slumbers,
All my verse will ne’er reveal;
I shall never sing in numbers
Half the passion that I feel.
Hidden in far founts of being,
The keen fire which thrills me lies,
Hidden, save for thy sweet seeing,
In the calmness of my eyes.
But it flows in subtle thrilling
Through my voice, and smile, and touch,
Gives a potence to my willing—
Wilt thou not confess as much ?
Eye to eye a moment linking
Drew thy nature into mine,
Lip to lip a moment drinking
Measures of ethereal wine ;
�14
Voice with voice in untranslated
Music sweeter than a rhyme,
Heart with heart a moment mated,
Crown’d a love unborn of time.
Did I truly live, my dearest,
Ere I saw thee—truly live ?
Yes, for thou no less wert nearest;
Time to us could only give
Outer tangible revealing
Of that love whereby we are;
So strikes light, the first faint feeling
Of a long-created star,
Shining with a silent beauty
Far in its appointed spot;
Swaying by inherent duty,
Us, although we knew it not.
Lo ! thou wert in every shadow
Cast at noon upon the sea;
Each green sunlight of the meadow
Trembled from thy heart to me;
Every pain was some dim shiver
Of thy spirit caught by mine—
Thou no less the sharer, giver,
Of my love and life divine;
Double-wing’d my prayer ascended,.
Double-thoughted strove my brain,
Soul to soul for ever tended—
Tell me if this kiss be gain!
If the deep heart’s inmost passion,
Leaping from my lip to thee,
Hath no subtler sign to fashion
Each apart and silently.”
�15
To the question, “ How shall I my true-love know from
many another one?” I reply, “Seek, and ye shall find.”
“ The eye, by long poring, comes to see even in the darkest
corner.” This I hold to be absolutely certain, that every
divinely-affianced wife and husband must bo of an exactly
equal age (for how can one exist without the other ?), and that
they must bear precisely the same individual characteristics
and mould of mind. “As each note in music echoes its
diapason,” so must each wife echo her husband’s thought—
each husband echo his wife’s feeling.
If each woman is virtually heart to her husband’s cor
responding mind, each man virtually mind to his wife’s
corresponding heart, each must indissolubly inhere within
the other; the seemingly two must be really one—one being,
one individual, one indivisible and inseparable soul.
As no two particles of matter, however near their
neighbourhood, ever touch, so no two human souls, however
close their relationship, ever mingle. In the conjugal
relationship alone is spiritual contact; for it is a relationship
within the soul, whilst all others are relationships with
out it.
To the end that each man may rationally and unmistak
ably recognise his wife, each woman hei' husband, it is of
first importance that all women as well as men should be
earnest and unfettered thinkers; for if, in the case of any
particular man, his divinely-affianced wife must be she
whose thoughts always exactly echo his thoughts; and in
the case of any particular woman, her divinely-affianced
husband must be he whose thoughts always prove themselves
to be the prototypes of her thoughts; how, in cases where
a woman’s thoughts are not her own, but the blindly ac
cepted thoughts of others, by this test can she recognise her
husband, or by him be recognised ?
$
�16
The feelings, as tests of conjugal relationship, can be only
infallible guides to the perfectly unselfish; for the disin
terested will always love the disinterested; but do the
selfish affect the selfish? Do they not rather seek, for selfish
purposes, alliance with those less selfish than themselves ?
But in a divinely-affianced pair the husband must necessarily
reflect the feelings of his wife—must be selfish or unselfish in
measure and manner as she.
Therefore, not only is disinterestedness a sine qua non
of conjugal recognition through the test of the affections,
but only in the degree in which we are disinterested will
alliance with the divinely-affianced one, when attained,
become to us the heaven we dream, whether here or in
the world beyond the grave.
Thus much, at present, towards the solution of this
momentous question. But I believe all physical science
to be overflowing with counties s beautiful analogies, which
wait but the glance of mind, fresh from the baptism of a
diviner chastity, humility, and love, to become divinely
eloquent of the science of humanity, and to resolve their
hieroglyphics into moral revelations from the Most High.
And it could not, surely, be very difficult, through the
combined efforts of the historian, the antiquary, and the
man of science, to classify all mankind dually in
families, and families of families, &c., &c., according to
relative predominant developments of the good and the
true; until, at length, the divine marriage relationship
should be, in every case, incontrovertibly proved, and the
laws that should govern it ascertained, through obedience to
which—lo 1 “ the Desire of all Nations ” would be universally
born into the world; and the emancipated earth, henceforth,
for evermore, from pole to pole, should reverberate with the
�17
angelic chant, “ Glory, glory to God in the highest, and
on earth peace and good will towards men!”
It remains for Reason to verify what the Heart has felt;
for Fact to confirm on earth what Fancy has dreamed in
heaven. Therefore, in the stirring words of our favourite,
Charles Mackay, I would exclaim—
“ Men of thought, be up and stirring
Night and day!
Sow the seed—withdraw the curtain—
Clear the way!
Men of action, aid and cheer them,
As ye may!
There’s a fount about to stream,
There’s a light about to beam,
There’s a warmth about to glow,
There’s a flower about to blow,
There’s a midnight blackness changing
Into grey.
Men of thought and men of action,
Clear the way!
u Once the welcome light has broken,
Who shall say
What the unimagined glories
Of the day ?
What the evil that shall perish
In its ray ?
Aid the dawning tongue and pen;
Aid it, hopes of honest men ;
Aid it, paper; aid it, type—
Aid it, for the hour is ripe,
And our earnest must not slacken
Into play.
Men of thought and men of action,
Clear the way!
�18
.
“ Lo! a cloud’s about to vanish
From the day;
And a brazen wrong to crumble
Into clay.
Lo ! the Right’s about to conquer—
Clear the way!
With the Right shall maDy more
Enter smiling at the door ;
With the giant Wrong shall fall
Many others, great and small,
That for ages long have held us
For their prey.
Men of thought and men of action,
Clear the way! ”
<
Now, dearest Gertrude, feeling sure I must have given
you quite enough to think about for the present, let me
conclude this my first letter on the subjects you have so
urged me to write upon. If what I have said should make
you wishful for a second letter on the same subjects, you
have only to let me know; but in any case, that “the wilder
ness and the solitary place may be glad for you, and that
the desert may l’ejoice and blossom as the rose,” will be ever
the wish, the prayer, and the effort of
Yours ever affectionately,
gauffer of giongsius.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Dear Gertrude...]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Daughter of Dionysius
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Margate
Collation: 18 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5622
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Marriage
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work ([Dear Gertrude...]), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Marriage
Women
Women's Rights
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/84f05148a09a392404d454979d37b355.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=tOTM92-8E77E-97%7E-DSUop-Gxk0Im6bucI6t37uRlVxFHkaDQbh3fnP6XWLjVzR4-UQoqXr0AAucIQAG-61hxjvFN0O4jOEv%7EXdmM5gpgCgXmmS7i7pVl0wcIPQl3V43TOs5RVg61VatnJdvuln0F0Yb36PEI4HJgMHMv8u8WNeDtxY3BJguTDDehmVE4irx5mAtkXHCLPbbL%7EBuiv5s8y2z2stwHWM6UIeyP4b2Izdn93Wmk7ZzCpuWIGzzpdyHAWkW2Dqi9oHqzMzkhRZ6cg56ag8Q5pT2JoEH4b0mjBAPf8NkQRxPA1MnWwqUmEBnQ17GDmfzGx1hPOei-uYSpw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2c8c62b9c5a152c543b092592bc74d5f
PDF Text
Text
Mrs. Lydia B. Denny,
WIFE OF
REUBEN S. DENNY,
OF BOSTON,
IN REGARD TO HER ALLEGED INSANITY.
��STATEMENT
Early in the year 1861, I consulted a lawyer in rela
tion to obtaining a divorce from my husband on the
grounds of cruelty and adultery. My married life had
been eminently unhappy, and the terms of, at least, indif
ference on which I had lived with my husband, were noto
rious. For the few years immediately preceding, I had
been constantly subjected to most peculiar and insulting
annoyances and outrages. So openly was I insulted that
my mother felt it a duty at one time to speak to me on
the subject, and my two sons repeatedly urged me to re
sent the indignities to which I was subjected. Finally,
when my expostulations and reproaches were met by per
sonal ill treatment, I resorted, as above stated, to the law
for redress. My counsel assured me from the first that I
had ample grounds for a divorce on both counts. I made
my own investigations, and the information I obtained I
imparted to my counsel and to those whom I then consid
ered as my friends. I also showed to many persons the
bruises and wounds my husband had inflicted on me, thus
giving (as I intended) publicity to a resentment which
was excited by the grossest and most public insults. I
told Mr. Denny of my intentions, and that I had consulted
a lawyer in reference to a divorce. He also knew that I
was in the care of an eminent female physician. Under
these circumstances, on the 25th of March, 1861, Mr.
Denny, assisted by two physicians, kidnapped me in open
day, in the streets of Boston, and conveyed me to the
McLean “ Asylum” (mad house), Somerville, Mass.,
without consulting or informing my friends and relatives,
or my physician, though, had I been insane, they would
have been the first consulted, and he would have been only
too glad to have given me into their hands. In this dread
ful prison, in spite of the unceasing efforts of my relatives
�4
to obtain my release, and in face of the fact that Mr. Denny
is notoriously and persistently guilty of all I ever charged
him with, I was kept eighteen months ; suffering an impris
onment the horrors of which must be endured to be un
derstood, though it would seem that the plainly apparent,
outside, inseparable cruelty of such an imprisonment must
be clear to the understanding of every human being. A
woman, a mother, torn from her home, her liberty, her
children, and immured in a mad house I without help’ and
without hope.. During this time I was allowed no com
munication with my friends in any way, nor any knowl
edge of them, or of anything whatever that it concerned
me to know—I was literally “ buried alive!” Everything
real in relation to my condition was utterly and systemat
ically ignored, and I was constantly told by Dr. Tyler
superintendent of the McLean “ Asylum ”), in reply to
my entreaties, arguments, reasonings, &c., to “ get well ”
—to “ get well.” Dr. Tyler was always unwilling to
argue (or converse) with me on the subject of my alleged
insanity, or to explain its nature, as I frequently urged
him to do,—being, of course, naturally anxious to know
what I was to “ get well ” of. I, however, soon under
stood that to accept the fact of my (alleged) insanity was
the indispensable first step toward getting “ well.” In
deed, Dr. Tyler told me. at one time that my insisting so
strongly on my sanity was proof to him that I was insane I
My alleged insanity has been variously designated as
“ Moral Insanity,Emotional Insanity,” “ Earnestness
of Mind,” “ Morbid state ofFeeling,” “ Fixed Idea,” “ Mo
nomania, li Spirit of Revenge,” etc. It has never, how
ever, been convenient or agreeable (not to say possible)
for Dr. Tyler to explain to me, my friends, or any one
else, the manner in which it was developed. Dr. Tyler
used often to assure me that “ Mr. Denny loved me very
dearly.” I gradually learned to understand the system
to which I had fallen a victim, and to know that I had no
hope from those who placed me there, who kept me there,
or who consented to my being there. I managed after a
time to throw from the carriage, when I rode, letters,
some of which, reaching my friends, incited them to fresh
efforts in my behalf. In October, 1861, they obtained a
hearing on habeas corpus ; but my “ counsel was so confi
dent that the whole court would discharge me, on the
�5
ground that my husband, when I was taking steps to ob
tain a divorce, could have no right to imprison me, whether
insane or not, that he introduced no evidence to prove my
soundness of mind, and made no argument on the ques
tion.” My sanity and perfect self-control were, however,
so palpably evident that “ strangers who were present and
heard the proceedings asserted my perfect soundness of
mind with great vehemence;” and even Dr. Tyler, after I
had gone through a long and severe cross-examination, was
forced to admit that I had neither said or done anything
incompatible with perfect sanity. Nevertheless, his gene
ral statement, that I was “ insane,” held good, and on that
general statement alone, in spite of my personal presence,
an unimpeachably sane woman, I was remanded back to an
imprisonment which every human being capable of reflec
tion must know to be worse than death. The efforts of
my friends to release me subjected them, also, to Mr. Den
ny’s persecutions; and as he has always had all the prop
erty of the family in his hands, he was enabled to annoy
and hinder them most effectually. But they persisted in
all lawful efforts, and finally Mr. Denny, finding it im
possible longer to stave off a jury trial, released his wife
from her imprisonment by an agreement with my mother
and brother-in-law. By the terms of this agreement, I am
under nominal guardianship for six months, yet the guardi
an has no power to restrain my liberty without the con
sent of my mother, who has always asserted my sanity, and
whose only anxiety is in regard to my personal safety ;
and it is expressly stated in the “ agreement ” that con
senting to this appointment “ is in no manner to be taken
as an admission that she (I) is of unsound mind, or to be
used to her (my) prejudice in any legal proceedings which
she (I) may hereaftei’ commence.” My friends consented
to this agreement because they felt that it was of the first
importance to obtain my release, it being impossible to
gain access to me in any other way, my counsel even not
being allowed to see me, thus leaving me without support,
information, or advice, pending a trial which involved to
me so much more than life. I, myself, was no party to
the “ agreement,” and am not bound by it in any way. I
never would have consented to any form of guardianship
whatever, having always asserted (confidently and abso
lutely) my sanity, and my perfect ability to take care of
myself and my family, as I always had done, without help
�6
or interference from any one, up to the very moment of
my seizure; although Mr. Denny and some of his rela
tives and friends have recently discovered, that, “ if I am
not insane,” I have a “ devilish temper,” and am quite
unfit to take charge of my children; and further, that “ if
Mr. Denny is a licentious man,” my aforesaid peculiarity
of “ temper” has, by rendering his home unhappy, driven
him to seek consolation in the arms of courtesans! which
discoveries, considering the circumstances under which they
are made, will perhaps be considered as remarkable as
they are original. As I said, I have always asserted my
sanity, and I, my friends, my relatives, my counsel, and
my physician, now assert that I have never said or done
any thing to any person, at any time, which could by any
(proper) construction be called insane. I have resented
the most atrocious outrages, the most monstrous abuse ;
and I do resent, and I should be ashamed of myself if I
resented in a less degree. But my resentment has never
impelled me to seek anything more than such poor redress
as Massachusetts law affords to married women. Accord
ing to the “ agreement,” Mr. Denny was to pay my board
(ten dollars a week) and furnish money for my other rea
sonable expenses. This he has not done—but on one and
another frivolous pretext, has refused to pay one penny to
ward my support, although he paid without hesitation
OR DEMUR, TWENTY DOLLARS A WEEK, AND ANY OTHER EX
PENSES Dr. Tyler chose to present, so long as I could
and in the endurance of what
he knew to be the most hideous misery. He also perse
cutes me by circulating industriously, constantly, and per
sistently the cruel falsehood of my “ insanity.” He has
found newspapers (respectable !) to publish false reports,
and the contemptible, petty lies on which his charge was
first founded (or, rather, sustained), and he himself and
his tools have stories adapted to all latitudes. To persons
who have seen me since my release, and know that I am,
and always have been, perfectly sane (and who tell him
they know it), he says : “ The doctors do not say so.
Mrs. Denny’s lawyers do not think so. They all admit
that she is insane, and every physician who has seen Mrs.
Denny has pronounced her insane.” Now, though seve
ral physicians saw me at the “ Asylum,” no one of them
(except those directly implicated in the crime against me)
be kept out of the way,
�has ever dared to say I was insane ; but, on the contrary,
some of them declared that they saw nothing in me that
indicated insanity. Of course, neither I nor my friends
recognize the interference or authority of physicians in
the matter at all. Yet I shall be infinitely obliged to any
one of them who shall have the independence, the manli
ness, the humanity to come forward (as I trust they will
at the proper time) and declare, what they all very well
know, namely—that I am, and always have been, perfect
ly sane. To other parties Mr. Denny says : “ Mrs. Denny
is very insane, as insane as ever (which to be sure is true),
and I shall be obliged to put her back again soon.”
Again, that I am “ only out for a short time”—that he
“ let me out on his own terms,” &c. He even has not
scrupled to say that “ Mrs. Denny’s family and relatives
all admit note, that she is, and always has been, insane.”
But what most excites the anxiety of my friends (and of
course my own), is the report that I am considered “ dan
gerous,” and that I have “ suicidal ” as well as “ homici
dal propensities.” In the false newspaper reports pub
lished at the time of my release this fatal charge was
inserted, and it has been so boldly reiterated that my
friends have received special cautions not to allow me at
any time to venture out alone; and it was suggested to
them, that these reports were preparatory to kidnapping
and effectually disposing of me, when they would be
brought forward to support the theory of suicide. I and
my friends know that Mr. Denny and the power behind
him are not to be trusted, and we feel that the course I
now take is not only my only mode of defence, but an
absolutely necessary precaution in reference to my per
sonal safety. By keeping me dependent on the charity
of my friends for support, Mr. Denny (besides the in
separable mortifications and embarrassments of such a
condition) puts it out of my power to see my children,
except at rare intervals. My children, for they are mine.
A woman’s children are hers by all laws of humanity, of
Nature, and of God. They are her flesh and her blood,
and my children are my groans, and my sighs, and my
tears. They are my life and my soul. I long for them
unceasingly; and this man knows—as have all tyrants,
great and small, from the beginning of the world—that
the most exquisite torture that can be inflicted on a mother
�8
is to separate and estrange her children from her. It1 is
not by any means a new device—only a comparatively
new mode of executing it. I am suffering especial anx
iety in regard to my youngest child (my only daughter),
who is living with strangers, and entirely isolated from
all her relatives. Her health is delicate and preca
rious ; and I am assured by an eminent physician, who
visited her at my request, that she cannot be properly
cared for in her present situation; that her health for life,
if not her very life, depends on the care she now receives,
and that she ought to be with her mother. I understand
my child’s constitution, and I understand my child as no
one else can; though I am sure no one can help under
standing the anguish I must endure in being separated
from her in such a manner, at such a time ; and I PRO
TEST against the CRUELTY of such treatment. When
a woman is robbed of her liberty, as I have been—that is
to say of her humanity, that is to say of her responsibil
ity, that is to say of her soul—she is considered—no, not
considered, but treated, like the “ thing ” she is repre
sented. I have been, I am, robbed of everything; of my
liberty (that includes all); of my property; of my
children. I was taken to my prison on a cold winter
night, without bonnet, or shawl, or wrapping of any kind.
Afterward, at different times, portions of my wardrobe
(not the choicest) were sent me ; and these articles, with
what was obtained for me during my imprisonment, and
what my friends have since obtained for me, constitute
my entire worldly possessions. The remainder of my
wardrobe, my personal and other ornaments, my money,
my books and pictures, letters and papers, the presents of
friends, all the souvenirs, memorials, and relics which are
so invaluable to their owners—miniatures of my children
and curls of their hair—this man refuses to restore to me ;
and he withholds the property I inherited from my father,
with much valuable personal property, bought with my
money and marked with my name; all of which, and
much more, I claim and demand.
Before closing this defence, this protest, this appeal, I
submit—that the pretense of my insanity is a falsehood,
so monstrous, and so patent, that any man would hesitate
to echo it. The terrible ordeal I have endured, so far
from developing any weakness or infirmity of mind, has,
�9
in the opinion of my friends, shown me to possess cour
age and endurance, energy and strength, not often sur
passed. Gentlemen, lawyers, physicians, conversing with
me, express their amazement that I did not become insane.
They say to me, “ Mrs. Denny, I wonder you did not
become insane.” “ I think I should have become insane.”
111 am sure I should have become insane.” But as I did
not, and would not, become insane, and as I am partially
escaped out of the hands of my enemies, I am persecuted
with slanders the foulest, the cruelest, the most malig
nant, the most injurious. I appeal to human hearts; I
am driven to this last extremity. Every one must under
stand how desperate is my condition, when, to preserve,
not my life only, but my liberty (without which life is
worthless, yea, intolerable), I am compelled to a course,
not less painful than unprecedented, and which is as utterly
opposed to all the habits of my life as it is to the customs
of society. But though my own immediate personal
safety compels this course, I cannot forget nor neglect to
warn all women to beware of a like fate,—for there is not
©ne who is not liable to all that has befallen me, with the
added horror of its continuance for life.
It remains to be seen if, in the “ freest country in the
world,” in this “ boasted nineteenth century,” public
opinion—“ society”—indorses an outrage (not to say a
system) for which the annals of the darkest ages ©f feu
dal tyranny could hardly furnish a parallel.
LYDIA B. DENNY.
Roxbury, Dec. 23, 1862.
The letters appended (and to which I refer in my
statement) are a few of the many written by me during
my imprisonment. These were picked up by different
persons and sent to Mr. Sewall in the first year. For
the last four months or more all fell into the hands of the
spies and keepers by whom I was constantly watched and
guarded. I was never allowed pen, ink, or paper, but I had
secured some bits of pencil before I was suspected, and I
saved the scraps of paper that came around my parcels,
and sometimes ventured to appropriate a blank leaf from
a book. With such materials—in terror, haste, and se
crecy—I tried to give some little idea of the cruel misery
1*
�10
I was enduring. My friends made several copies of the
letters, which were read by many persons, and they were
also read in open court, at the different times when my
friends were endeavoring to obtain my release. For
these reasons I print the letters, and also because every
person of ordinary common sense oi' intelligence who
reads them, must know that they were not written by an
insane person ; although the circumstances of my case are
alone sufficient to prove, absolutely, that I was never
insane. Of course, I utterly repudiate the modern theory
of insanity, popularized by physicians and other interested
persons—a theory which, wherever it prevails, holds un
der its monstrous ban, subject to its hideous penalties,
every human being ! It should be constantly remembered
that during my whole imprisonment I was kept in entire
ignorance of all that it concerned me to know ; that every
thing real in my condition was absolutely ignored, while
I was simply the insane wife of a tender and devoted hus
band ! And I trust that the circumstances under which
these letters were written, with the loss of many inter
vening, will explain any seeming incoherence.
LYDIA B. DENNY.
The first six letters were written before the habeas
corpus—the others after.
LETTER I.
George, you are deceived; believe nothing, but see
me; and O, do not wait too long, till I am dead with
despair and sorrow, but if I never see you again, I shall
not think you have forsaken me. I know you are deceived.
I have not much hope that you will get this, but if you
do, it is best for me that you keep it to yourself. Did
you get any letters from me after I left New York ?
I have written you once before from here, hoping you
may get one or the other, for I must have some hope. It
does not seem to me I can bear it much longer.
I ask the finder of this to inclose it—mail it—directed
to Mr. George Kinney, No. 1 Henry Street, Brooklyn, N.
I
a
�11
Y. I put in money for envelope and stamp, and beseech
you to send it; and so may God send you help in your
sorest need!
[Picked up in Maplewood, Malden, 22d April, 1861, by J. Brown, Jr.]
LETTER II.
A gentleman of Boston keeps his wife confined, be
cause, after enduring years of neglect and cruelty, she
finally exposed his brutality, by showing to a number of
persons the bruises he had inflicted on her person, and
telling the outrages he had committed against her. To
cover this, and prevent her obtaining a divorce, she is
shut up—to be cured, she is told, of the “nervousness”
which makes her fancy she was ill-treated. Her desire
to be released from captivity and obtain justice is called
a spirit of revenge, which is insanity. For four months
she has not looked on a face she ever saw before, and only
knows she has children and friends from the assurance
(given when she asks) that her “ friends are all well.”
Her health is giving way, and she fears she cannot endure
till she is rescued. If the finder of this will send it to
Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston, he will know if any
thing can be done for her relief; or to Mr. George Kin
ney, No. 1 Henry Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. Money en
closed to pay for stamp and envelope.
Mr. Sewall knows her story. He advised her what
to do; but she thought she might take a little time to make
up her mind, not knowing that what has happened to her
was possible. She was taken from home by force, with
out a moment’s notice. She desires to act as Mr. Sewall
advised. Expressing that desire and intention where she
is, she knows is fatal to her unless she is rescued, and she
feels or fears she cannot much longer endure her cruel
captivity and the more cruel injustice that causes it. The
finder is again earnestly entreated to send this paper to
Mr. Sewall.
�12
LETTER III.
Reuben S. Denny resides at No. 5 Union Park, Bos
ton. His wife, after enduring years of neglect and un
kindness, was finally rendered desperate by his cruelty,
and exposed him by showing to a number of persons the
bruises he had inflicted on her, and telling the outrages
he had committed against her. To cover this, and to
prevent her obtaining a divorce, which would further
expose him, he keeps her confined in the McLean Asylum,
Somerville, to be cured, she is told, of the nervousness
which makes her fancy she was ill-treated. For more
than four months she has not looked on a face she ever
saw before, and only knows that she has children, a
mother, brother, sister, by being told (when she asks)
that they are well. She was taken from her home by
force, without a moment’s warning. The cruel separation
from her children and.friends, and the more cruel injustice
that compels it, she feels is killing her, and she fears soon.
She has no appetite, but forces herself to take as much
as she possibly can, hoping to endure till she is rescued.
The finder of this is entreated to take or send it to the
Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston, who knows her story,
and she hopes will interpose to save her before it is too
late. Mr. Sewall was her lawyer, and advised hei' what
to do ; but she thought she might take a little time to
make up her mind, not knowing that this which has hap
pened t© her was possible.
She desires to assure Mr. Sewall that she has no story
to tell but the one she told him, and she demands an in
vestigation. She wishes to see him, and her mother and
brother, who are entirely deceived in regard to her con
dition.
Her mother, Mrs. D. Kinney, and her brother, Mr.
George Kinney, resided at No. 1 Henry Street, Brooklyn,
New York.
She begs Mr. Sewall to see her, as he can know nothing
of her unless he does; and, O, let it be soon, for she has
no other hope.
�13
LETTER IV.
Reuben S. Denny resides at No. 5 Union Park, Boston.
His wife, after enduring years of neglect and unkindness,
was finally rendered desperate by his cruelty, and exposed
him by showing the bruises he had inflicted on her per
son, and telling the outrages he had committed against
her. To cover this, and to prevent her obtaining a divorce,
which would further expose him, he keeps her confined in
the McLean Asylum, Somerville, to be cured, she is told,
of the nervousness which makes her “ fancy ” she was illtreated. For more than four months she has not seen a
face she ever saw before, and only knows she has children,
a mother, brother, and sister, from being told (when she
asks) that her “ friends are all well.” This cruel captivity
and separation from all she loves, with the more cruel in
justice that compels it, she fears she cannot much longer
endure, as her health is much impaired, and her appetite
entirely fails.
The finder of this is earnestly entreated to take or send
it to the Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston, who knows her
story, and she trusts will interpose in her behalf before it
is too late. Mr. Sewall was her lawyer, and advised her
what to do, but she thought she might take time to make
up her mind—not knowing that this which has happened
to her was possible. She was taken from her home by
force, without a moment’s warning. She desires Mr. Sewall
to act for her—she thinks with his knowledge of her case
he can demand an investigation. She has, and has had,
no story but the one she told him. She is sure that if her
case was investigated, or if her friends had knowledge of
her real condition, she could not be detained here one
hour. She submits that her friends ought to understand
that any distress of mind they might have seen her ex
hibit was the legitimate and natural (immediate) result of
the treatment to which she had been subjected—at least
with her—and they ought to believe nothing from the
man who was so careful to put her effectually out of the
way before he made his explanations. If she dies here,
they will probably never see her alive, as they would not
�14
be sent for till too late. "Women, mothers of young
children, have been kept here years, and finally died here,
without once being allowed to see their children, not even
at the last—not insane women—except with the peculiar
insanity which only the husband and the physician can dis
cern, or perhaps a friend or two who has the “ reputation
of the family at heart.” Her mother and brother, Mrs.
D. Kinney and Mr. George Kinney, reside at No. 1 Henry
Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. She appeals to any one possess
ing a human heart to pity her in her extremity, and send
this to Mr. Sewall, her mother, or brother.
[The greater part, indeed almost the whole, of this letter (D) is a literal copy
of the above, the variations so slight, it has not been thought necessary to
make a copy.]
LETTER V.
I am obliged to write in secrecy and haste. I hope
the ordinary allowance will be made for incoherence. I
think I need medical treatment (I beg not to distress my
friends), but I will never ask or receive it from any per
son here—not because I am insane or obstinate, for I sup
pose it is only natural that I should prefer to choose my
own physician, that I should desire to be treated by those in
whom I can feel confidence, and that I object to placing
myself in the hands of those toward whom circumstances
compel me to feel some degree of distrust. I do not say
this because I am anxious about my health (for if I cannot
have liberty I desire death, which, being a patriotic senti
ment, can’t be insane); but if I die here (I say again), it
is murder, and I will never by word or act so much as
imply consent, but, as from the first so to the last, I will
protest; and I hereby take to witness the person or per
sons finding and reading this paper, that I, Lydia B. Den
ny,
sound mind, declare I am unjustly and illegally
imprisoned in the McLean Asylum, Somerville, and that
I appeal to the laws of my country for redress, and demand
my liberty, and an open, legal investigation, that I may
establish the truth of what I here assert.
The accompanying paper was written some time ago.
I have neither opportunity or paper to rewrite it, and so
�15
will add a few lines. Since writing it, I have taken such
opportunity as I have, and spoken (appealed) to the
Trustees, and with precisely the result I anticipated. The
business of the Trustees is to indorse Dr. Tyler; not, by
any means, to entertain complaints or redress grievances,
which might possibly implicate him, the institution, or
themselves. Of course this is merely my opinion, but it
seems to me quite warranted by my experience. I finally
asked one of the gentlemen, a lawyer, if, knowing or de
claring myself sane, and my imprisonment cruel, unjust,
and illegal—my friends, deceived as to my condition (or
for any other reason), consenting—thus leaving me without
help or hope—there was for me no redress—no resource.
He said I could “ appeal to the laws of my country.” I
waited another week, and, at the next visit, told him I de
sired to appeal to the law, through you, and with your
advice. I said, however, I should prefer to be released
without resorting to the law. The answer was : “I will
tell Mr. Sewall what you say.” I have waited two weeks
longer, without result, and am forced again to try the for
lorn hope. Sir, if there is any law for me, I appeal to it;
and J submit that (sane or insane) the circumstances of
my case give me a right to demand a legal investigation.
I demand, first, my liberty-, and shall authorize or con
sent to no investigation where that is not the first step.
I assert confidently that my friends have no idea of my
real condition. I assure them they would not find me
troublesome. I am neither restless, nervous, or sad ; on
the contrary, I am calm, quiet, cheerful, and withal indus
trious. I never before preserved so equal a demeanor,
for there was never before a time when I dared not act as
I felt, and speak what I thought. Now, if I feel indigna
tion, contempt, terror, disgust, pity, sorrow, longing, I
endure, and am silent, and I wait. I have waited six
months and in all that time, I have had no word, message,
or greeting from any person outside these walls, except,
sir, your visit; nor have 1 sent any except as I send this.
L. B. DENNY.
To the Hon. Saml. E. Sewall, Boston.
Dr. Tyler says your visit was a matter of courtesy to
you.
�16
LETTER VI.
I am compelled to write secretly and in haste, and
cannot choose my words. I make as many copies as I
can, hoping some one of them may reach you. I think
I need medical treatment (I hope my friends will not be
too anxious), but I will never ask or receive it from any
person here, not because I am insane or obstinate—for I
suppose it is only natural that 1 should prefer to choose
my own physician—that I should desire to be treated by
those in whom I can feel confidence, and that I object to
placing myself in the hands of those toward whom cir
cumstances compel me to feel some degree of distrust. I
say again, if I die here, it is murder, and I will never, by
word or act, so much as imply consent, but, as from the
first so to the last, I will protest; and I hereby take to
witness the person or persons finding and reading this
paper that I, Lydia B. Denny, of sound mind, declare that
I am unjustly and illegally imprisoned in the M<Lean
Asylum, Somerville; and that I appeal to the laws of my
country for redress, and demand an open, legal investiga
tion, that I may establish the truth of what I here assert.
When I was forced from my home and brought to this
place I had four children. My youngest, a little girl, seven
years old, is, I suppose, with her aunt, in Cambridge.
Almost every time I ride I go in sight of the back of the
house where she lives. I have often asked to be taken
past the front, thinking I might get a glimpse of my child.
The request seems to be regarded as rather a pleasant
joke : it is never granted. Now, such may be excellent
discipline for insane people—I can’t say, but to me, or
any sane mother, it is simply cruelty, cruelty—equally
wicked and contemptible. It is an easy thing for Dr.
Tyler to say it is his opinion that I am insane; but is Dr.
Tyler infallible ? I heard him admit that it was possible
he might be mistaken. Ought the opinion of one, or
two, or twenty men, subject a woman to such an ordeal
as I have endured for the last six months, without at least
giving her a chance for her life, or, what is of infinitely
more value, her liberty ?
�17
Dr. Tyler says he does not believe what I say of my
husband is true ; and if he did, he calls my desire to be
restored to my friends and to obtain justice a spirit of
revenge.
When I say Mr. Sewall advised me to get a divorce
from my husband, and that if my condition was under
stood he could not keep me an hour, he does not wish to
argue the question.
L. B. D.
LETTER VII.
To Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston:—I am afraid,
sir, that you have failed (for the present) in your efforts
to release me from this dreadful place ; and I am afraid,
too, that it is my own fault. I suppose I should have told
my story more fully; but I was so absorbed with anxiety
and the dread of returning here, that I had scarcely any
other thought or feeling. I had no chance. I can have
none until I am removed from this place. I think, sir, I
told you how I was brought here. On a cold winter
night, with snow on the ground, and my feet wet to my
ankles, without bonnet oi’ shawl, or wrapping of any kind,
I was forced into a carriage and brought here. I asked
to be allowed to get some covering and bid good-by to
my child; I was refused. I suffered for three weeks writh
a severe cold then contracted ; though I believe the theory
here is, that “excited patients” do not take cold. If I
am to remain longer here, cannot you visit me again ? I
wish to tell you some things which I am sure it is import
ant you should know, and there are circumstances I am
desirous my friends should know, in case I never have an
opportunity of telling them myself. If proofs are now
of any importance, I think I can show how they may be
obtained. I believe I have never told any one what I
learned on my last visit to New York, and I certainly
made important discoveries. Perhaps I am unwise in
advising you at this time; but this suspense, anxiety, igno
rance, dread, is so hard to bear; and yet, since I have seen
my friends I bear it better, and, whatever may be the
result, I shall continue to.
My insanity here still consists in my thinking I am
ill-used, and supposing that those who imprison me here
�18
are not my best friends. The anxiety of my friends and
your efforts in my behalf are utterly ignored.
L. B. DENNY.
(Received May 12, 1862.
S. E. S.)
LETTER VIII.
Dr. Tyler has represented to (told ?) my friends that
I was contented and willing to be here. I have never to
any person, at any time, said or intimated anything which
could by any possibility be so construed; but I have in
variably expressed to him and others the most intense and
earnest desire to be liberated and restored to my friends.
I have said repeatedly to Dr. Tyler, and to my attendant,
that I had rather die than to remain here as I was, even for
a limited time—that life could offer me nothing to com
pensate for such terrible endurance—that the separation
and estrangement from my children alone was too much
to endure. It is but a few days since I endeavored to express
to Dr. Tyler the anguish of my mind in the thought that
to my younger children I was already as one dead. I
have expressed these feelings, and none other, repeatedly,
to Dr. Blackman, Miss Barber, and my attendant, telling
them it was simply compelled endurance ; I have at the
same time presented a cheerful and composed exterior—
employing myself constantly, and availing myself of every
possible resource.
Dr. Tyler said to me thWmy insisting on my sanity
was a proof of insanity—if I were really sane, I should
begin to think myself insane. I repeated these remarks
to the trustees (Mr. Davis, Mr. Lowell). Mr. Lowell
laughed and said, “ that is rather strong.” Dr. Tyler
made some modifying explanation. One of the trustees
said to me that my friends refused to receive me—Mr.
Rogers.
I submit that Dr. Tyler can now have no pretext for
detaining me, as he must admit that it is impossible I
should ever return to my husband.
�19
LETTER IX.
I wish to be at the Court next Monday morning. I
think the law allows me the privilege. I asked Dr. Tyler,
in presence of the trustees, if he intended to take me there.
He does not. He thinks it is “ not good for me to keep
this matter stirring ; it confirms my peculiar views.” I
then asked him (and them) if the law did not allow me to
decide for myself whether to be present or absent ? The
question was evaded. Then I stated plainly and fully
that I desired to be present in Court next Monday morn
ing (Nov. 25, 1861), and demanded all my rights and
privileges under the law. I wish at least for the opportu
nity it would give me to see my friends once more.
L. B. DENNY.
The finder is requested to take or send this to the
Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston. Money inclosed for en
velope and postage. The horrors I am compelled to wit
ness and to hear are too dreadful for my endurance.
(Received April 14,1862.
S. E. 9.
Left at my office with three other papers, I am told, April 12, by some person
unknown.
9. E. S.)
LETTER X.
I was so closely watched, it was impossible for me to
throw out the accompanying paper before the time speci
fied, nor is the vigilance since relaxed; but I shall keep
the paper by me, and if opportunity ever comes, trust to the
chance that before befriended me. Of course I know no
thing about law, but it would seem that there is none for
me—that the insane (those to whom insanity is imputed)
have no rights that the sane are bound to respect. I have
not heard a -word of my friends, or anything that concerns
me, since I left them in the court-house, nearly two months
ago. I ask no questions. I could only hear they were
well or ill, alive or dead ; and as I do not wish to know if
they are ill or dead, I know nothing. None can realize
�20
what such a life is, except they have experienced it; but
it is not so bad, nor ever can be again, as before I saw my
friends. My friends understand they can know nothing of
my real condition, except as they know me, for the truth
cannot be told by those who keep me here—who have
kept me here already nearly nine months, when there has
never been the shadow of a reason for keeping me one
hour, as every person here well knows.
In the very enormity of the deed is its safety. But I
am not in the least blinded or confused. I know just what
has been (and is) done to me, and why; and I know also
that I am helpless, and, from those who keep me here,
hopeless. I complain to no one here, nor mention my
affairs in any way. I never intend to again. I maintain
a demeanor perfectly tranquil, equal, and cheerful. I long
for my children with unutterable anguish. For my mo
ther and my brother I am most anxious, for I know they
will suffer much for me. I wish them to know that I bear
it as well as any one could; but it is bitter, it is cruel.
The knowledge of their dear love and sympathy is my
great support, my strong consolation; and may I not say
to you, dear sir, that I know and feel (if I cannot express)
what I owe to you. You said you would not forsake me,
and I know you will not. But, sir, if you cannot save
me, do not give up my cause. Save others. Truth (if
you could get at it) and justice ought to be strong enough
to break down even this monstrous “ refuge of lies.”
Sir, this place is ruled by terror.
(Received April 14th, 1862. Left at office April 12,1862.
S. E. S.)
LETTER XI.
I have now endured this imprisonment for nearly a
year. At times I am weak and tired, and able to sit up
but part of the day. I have no exercise, and that, I sup
pose, with the wearing anguish of my imprisonment and
separation from all I love, wastes my strength. I suppose,
too, that I need medical treatment, as Miss Z. will under
stand. Of my own affairs I know absolutely nothing. I
ask no questions; I make no complaints ; I am at all times
cheerful, serene, equal; but my life is a burden. To every
honorable mind, degradation is worse than death—and
this life (of mine) is, besides its anguished longings, a daily
�21
and deadly humiliation. Dr. Tyler has told me repeat
edly, within the last three months, that I am “ much bet
ter
but to be “ well ” I am to acknowledge that I have
labored under a delusion, and that the charges I brought
against my husband (especially those in relation to his
cruelty) were the result of said delusion. I shall never
make any such acknowledgment. I feel that I take my
life in my hand when I risk having it known here that I
have again attempted to communicate with my friends;
but, because I do not wish to live, here, I take the risk—
not that I desire to die; except as a release from this fear
ful imprisonment, wherein I am environed with miseries
and terrors that sicken the soul and curdle the blood ; but
I dare not say so here. Sir, no one can form an idea of
the system here maintained—a very “system of terror”
—and such terror as can compel its victims to appear
cheerful. Can there be greater, except it produce death ?
And that many do die here from terror and despair, is un
questionable. It may be called the “ crushing-out ” sys
tem, perfected. Such things as I have heard and known,
seen and felt! And my experience is the experience of
all here—modified and varied, of course, by intelligence,
temperament, circumstances, and, above all, the sanity or
insanity of the victim. Every one who knows anything of
my case knows, of course, that I am not and never have
been insane; and let not my friends ever for a moment
admit the deadly lie—a lie that entails not only on my
innocent children, but on theirs also, its blighting curse.
I have been represented as an insanely jealous woman, a
liar, and a murderess (in heart). Iwas jealous of my rights,
my honor, and my dignity, as a woman, a wife, and a mo
ther (for my sons were fully cognizant of my wrongs); but
that I was ever jealous of that man, I disdain to admit. I
was insulted, outraged, maltreated, bruised; and, in my
desperate, but perfectly legitimate, grief and anger, I told
the truth; and not all the truth even then. I did also at
times express in tolerably strong language the hatred and
contempt I felt, always have felt, and always shall feel,
for cruelty and meanness. To cloak these exposures, and
to prevent my obtaining a divorce, which would give them
still further publicity, I was kidnapped and brought here,
with circumstances of barbarous cruelty; and here, for
nearly a year, I have been imprisoned, suffering terrors
and anguish that cannot be described; and here, unless
�22
my friends can rescue me, I shall die (not, alas! the first
victim), for I am in the hands of those who are as cruel
as guilt, and cowardice, and power, can make men, and,
withal, as relentless and secret as the grave.
Before I was brought here, I asked only such repara
tion as the law would give me. Since, I have asked only
my liberty and a fair and open investigation. Now I
know nothing about law, but I do know what is just and
right; and I know that any act, any system, any institu
tion which shuns investigation when accused or suspected,
shuns it because it cannot bear it; but I do not think Jaw
keeps me here—it is money, and power, and influence.
Patients sometimes die suddenly here. Of course, I
know what would be said of this remark here, but the
statement is, nevertheless, true; and if I die here, I say
to my friends (to you, sir), do not let this matter rest.
Try to save others. Let no consideration deter you from
giving publicity to my story, and so exposing, as far as
you can, a system which has in its dreadful toils thou
sands of miserable victims, and which every year mur
ders with torments hundreds of innocent and helpless
human beings. Do not my sufferings and my treatment
indorse my words ? I do not speak of dying because I
am alarmed or anxious about my health. I am not; but
let my friends bear in mind that I know nothing at all
that it concerns me to know, or that I care to know. I
do not even know if they are alive or dead, and my only
prospect is an idefinite hope. For my children and my
friends I long with intolerable longings. My poor heart
is so wrung and tortured that I sometimes feel it can
endure no more, no longer. God be merciful to me,
and grant me the “ desire of mine eyes ”—my children,
my friends I
I am sometimes exhibited to gentlemen, strangers,
besides the trustees, possibly that they may testify to my
comfort, content, happiness.
Of these papers I make several copies, that there may
be the better chance for some one package reaching its
destination.
I entreat the person finding these papers to take or
send them to the Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston.
I inclose money for postage and envelope.
(Rec’d April 14,1862.
Left at office April 12,1861, I am told, with three other papers.
8. E. S.
S. E. g.)
�23
LETTER XII.
During my imprisonment in this place, the suite of
rooms next mine has been occupied by a young lady from
Boston. Last Saturday evening, March 29, this young
lady was burned to death. She lingered till the next
night, about midnight, when she died, here. Monday night
her body was privately removed. Her death was re
corded in the Boston papers, under the usual head, in the
usual manner, as “ Died in this city,” &c. This accident
is to be concealed, that the reputation of this institution
may remain intact. I think but three of the patients
know how she died. It is one of the secrets of this place.
Sir, I know it is not safe for me to be acquainted
with their secrets. I do not think I am afraid to die ; but
this life is too fearful.
Can you,do nothing for me?
The Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston.
(Deceived April 14, 1862.
S. E. S.
Left, I am told, at my office, April 12,1862, with three other papers.
S. E. S.)
LETTER XIII.
Sir :—Saturday evening, March 29th,'a young lady
from Boston, a “ patient ” here, was so terribly burned
as to cause her death. She lingered till the next night,
when she died, here, about midnight. Monday night her
body was privately removed. Her death was recorded
in the Boston papers, under the usual head, in the usual
manner, as “ Died in this city,” &c. This accident is
concealed, I suppose (I heard as much said), that the repu
tation of the institution may remain intact. I think (for
the subject is not alluded to, and I dare not ask) that
but three of the patients are acquainted with the manner
of her death. It is one of the secrets of this place. Sir,
I am sure it is not safe for me to be cognizant of these
secrets. This is a fearful place. You can have no idea
of the system here maintained—a “ system of terror,”
�' 24
which has in its cruel toils (here and in other places)
thousands of miserable victims, and which every year
murders with torments (the torments of fear, anguish, and
despair) hundreds of helpless and innocent human beings.
It is now more than a year since I was, with cruel vio
lence, torn from my children and brought to this dreadful
place. Since then, with the exception of which you are
aware, I know absolutely nothing of them, my friends, or
anything that it concerns me to know. I still cherish
hope, and shall while life remains; but, knowing of this
place and those who keep me here, and knowing (I may
say) nothing else, I greatly fear. I long for my children
and my friends with inexpressible anguish. I think
sometimes I cannot bear it; but I do, and better than
many others. The miseries and horrors I am compelled
to witness ^nd to know add greatly to my sufferings. But
I make no complaints here. I am always cheerful and
serene—taking care, however, to have it understood that
I am simply enduring what is inevitable. No one sup
poses that I am either happy or contented,’ and no one
has ever supposed that I was insane; but they all under
stand their business.
O, sir, if you (my friends) cannot rescue me, I shall
never leave this place alive. From those who keep me
here nothing of my real condition can be known. Facts
and realities are utterly and systematically ignored. If
it were not so terrible a tragedy, it would be an absurd
farce; and it is, if possible, even more contemptible than
wicked. No honest, honorable mind can conceive such
mean wickedness ; it must be known to be believed. I,
alas ! have had full experience.
The finder of this is entreated to send or take this to
the Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston.
I have no money to pay for envelope and postage, and
inclose car tickets, hoping they will be deemed equivalent.
Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, Boston.
(Received April 11,1862.
88.)
[Letter (C) was received April 10,1862. It is evident that one was copied
from the other—I mean (C) from (H), or (H) from (C). The variations are so
few and unimportant that no copy is made of it.]
jq*
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Statement of Mrs. Lydia B. Denny, wife of Reuben S. Denny, of Boston, in regard to her alleged insanity
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Denny, Lydia B.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [Boston]
Collation: 24 p. ; 20 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes letters written by Mrs. Denny to her lawyer, Samuel E. Sewall, during her imprisonment.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1863]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5226
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women's rights
Domestic violence
Mental health
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A defence of atheism: being a lecture delivered in Mercantile Hall, Boston, April 10, 1861), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Divorce
Domestic violence
Mental Health
Women's Rights